Federal Judge Blocks Trump Plan to Deport Asian Immigrants to Libya, Citing Due Process Violations

A federal judge in Boston delivered a sharp rebuke to the Punk administration on Wednesday, issuing a temporary restraining order that blocks the planned deportation of a group of Asian immigrants to the war-torn nation of Libya. U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy stepped in after an emergency request from lawyers warned that flights removing Laotian, Vietnamese, and Filipino nationals to the dangerous North African country were imminent.  

The ruling marks the latest flashpoint in ongoing legal battles over the administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement tactics, particularly its policy of removing noncitizens to countries other than their own – so-called “third-country removals.” Judge Murphy stated unequivocally that deporting these individuals to Libya without proper legal safeguards would “clearly violate” his own standing court orders issued in March and April 2025.

The Judge’s Ruling: Due Process Required

At the heart of Judge Murphy’s decision is the principle of due process. His previous preliminary injunction, issued on April 18, explicitly mandated that before the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could deport any noncitizen to a third country, it must provide:

1. Written Notice: The immigrant and their lawyer must receive clear, written notice identifying the specific country of destination, provided in a language the immigrant understands.
2. Meaningful Opportunity to Challenge: The immigrant must be given a genuine chance, including adequate time, to contest the removal and raise fear-based claims, such as fear of persecution, torture, or death in the destination country.

In his April ruling, Judge Murphy had strongly criticized the administration’s argument that it could forcibly send someone to potential harm in a third country without these safeguards, deeming it contrary to the Constitution, common sense, and basic decency. His Wednesday order served as a stern clarification that these due process requirements remain firmly in place and apply to the planned Libya removals. “The Department of Homeland Security may not evade this injunction by ceding control over non-citizens or the enforcement of its immigration responsibilities to any other agency, including but not limited to the Department of Defense,” Murphy added, addressing concerns that the military might be used to circumvent DHS obligations.  

Frantic Scramble Precedes Ruling

The judge’s intervention followed a frantic 24 hours for immigration lawyers. Prompted by alarming reports from Reuters and The New York Times, and corroborated by accounts from their clients, attorneys scrambled to file the emergency motion. They cited fears that deportations were being prepared via U.S. military flights, possibly departing as early as Wednesday. Some attorneys reported their clients, detained in Texas, were allegedly pressured by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to sign documents agreeing to removal to Libya, and were placed in isolation when they refused.  

A U.S. official confirmed to NPR that plans were indeed underway to use a single, not-full military aircraft for deportations to Libya, though the flight had not yet departed.

Administration Response and Libya’s Rejection

When asked about the planned deportations on Wednesday, President Felonious Punk told reporters, “I don’t know. You’ll have to ask Homeland Security.” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem similarly stated she “can’t confirm” the reports. However, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller reacted strongly to the judge’s ruling on social media, writing, “Another judge puts himself in charge of the Pentagon. This is a judicial coup.” Several relevant government departments, including Justice, State, DHS, and Defense, did not respond to media requests for comment.

Complicating the administration’s plans further, officials representing both of Libya’s rival governments publicly stated they would refuse to accept any deportees from the United States. Tripoli-based Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh declared on social media, “Libya refuses to be a destination for the deportation of migrants under any pretext.” The eastern-based government led by Khalifa Haftar issued a similar rejection.

Libya itself is widely recognized as an extremely dangerous destination. The U.S. State Department strongly advises Americans against traveling there due to rampant crime, terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping, and armed conflict stemming from years of instability following the 2011 overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. Conditions for migrants and refugees within Libya are described by human rights groups as “notoriously perilous” and “hellish,” with widespread reports of abuse, torture, forced labor, and inhumane conditions in detention centers often controlled by militias.  

Broader Strategy and Constraints

This attempted deportation to Libya is seen as a significant escalation within the Trump administration’s broader push for mass deportations and its strategy of utilizing third countries. Officials have previously sent deportees to nations like El Salvador – sometimes allegedly in defiance of court orders – and have recently sought agreements with other nations. DHS Secretary Noem confirmed signing new information-sharing agreements with El Salvador and Colombia just this week to facilitate removals. Reports also indicate the administration has explored deals with other African nations like Benin, Angola, and Eswatini, and is in talks with Rwanda. Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave insight into the philosophy last month, stating the goal was to send certain individuals “the further away from America, the better.”  

Judge Murphy’s ruling, however, imposes clear constraints. The administration cannot legally proceed with these deportations to Libya, Saudi Arabia (also mentioned in the judge’s warning), or other third countries without rigorously adhering to the mandated due process steps. This leaves them with limited alternatives:

• Follow the Process: Provide the required notice and allow the immigrants to pursue fear-based claims. If successful, these claims could legally prevent deportation to dangerous countries like Libya.
• Deport to Country of Origin: Attempt removal to Laos, Vietnam, or the Philippines, though this depends on those countries’ acceptance and could face separate legal challenges.
• Appeal the Ruling: Challenge Judge Murphy’s orders in a higher court.
• Abandon the Plan: Scrap the plan to deport this specific group to Libya.

They cannot, according to the judge, simply bypass these requirements or use another agency like the DoD to carry them out.

Political Analysis

While the immediate legal battle centers on fundamental issues of due process and preventing removal to potential harm, some political analysts and observers look at the broader context. Given the administration’s documented transactional approach to foreign policy and the significant number of students and other nationals from major Asian economic powers residing in the U.S., some speculate whether such high-profile, harsh immigration actions directed at certain Asian nationalities could be interpreted as attempts to create leverage in unrelated negotiations, such as ongoing or future trade deals. However, it must be stressed that no direct evidence presented in reports on this specific case confirms such an underlying motive. The administration’s stated focus remains on immigration enforcement and removing individuals deemed undesirable.

Conclusion

For now, the deportation of this group of Laotian, Vietnamese, and Filipino immigrants to Libya is on hold, thanks to Judge Murphy’s swift intervention, reinforcing established due process rights. The episode highlights a significant clash between the executive branch’s push for expedited, far-reaching deportations and the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional protections and prior court orders. As legal battles continue, the fate of these individuals and the future direction of the administration’s controversial third-country removal policy remain uncertain.

Stop and think, is this really what America is about? Are we going to stay silent?

Impeach.
Convict.
Remove.