Why It Matters
The Trump administration has dramatically expanded the use of third-country removals, with advocacy groups estimating over 21,000 individuals removed to more than 30 countries through formal and informal agreements. A new Congressional Research Service report examines the impact of this expansion, enabled by a legal framework embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act. This law permits the Secretary of Homeland Security to remove aliens to another country willing to accept them when removal to the designated country or a country to which the aliens have a connection would be impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible.
President Trump's January 2025 Executive Order "Securing our Borders" directed the State Department to coordinate with the Attorney General and the Department of Homeland Security to advance international agreements that facilitate these removals, bypassing the standard deportation process to a person's home nation.
Countries receiving removed individuals through these agreements include Cameroon, Costa Rica, the Democratic Republic of Congo, El Salvador, Eswatini, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Uzbekistan, and Mexico, with Mexico receiving the most individuals. Many individuals removed to these third countries lack citizenship, legal status, social ties, a common language, and cultural familiarity in their destination countries.
The Big Picture
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act provision, third-country removal is supposed to be a last resort, triggered only when removal to the home country or a country of connection is impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible. Two substantive legal protections exist: the act provides for withholding of removal to countries where an alien's life or freedom would be threatened on account of a statutorily protected ground, and the Convention Against Torture (CAT) bars the transfer of aliens to a country where they would more likely than not face torture.
Under a July 2025 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memorandum, if the State Department finds diplomatic assurances credible, removal can proceed without further process. If assurances are not credible or not provided, ICE issues a Notice of Removal in a language the individual understands, with a 24-hour waiting period, reducible to six hours in undefined "exigent circumstances." Critically, under the memorandum, ICE does not ask whether the individual fears the third country; the individual must proactively express fear. If fear is expressed, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services conducts an eligibility screening for withholding or CAT protection.
During standard removal proceedings, an alien has the right to apply for relief or protection from removal and present evidence and testimony before an immigration judge. If relief or protection is denied, the immigration judge generally issues an order of removal, which becomes final in specified circumstances. Most aliens ordered removed in standard proceedings may select the country of removal.
The Bottom Line
A district court issued a preliminary injunction requiring written notice and a meaningful opportunity to raise CAT claims in third-country removal cases, but the Supreme Court stayed that order in June 2025, allowing removals to resume.
In February 2026, a different district court dissolved its preliminary injunction but issued a final judgment vacating the third-country removal policy altogether. The First Circuit then stayed that decision pending appeal, leaving the policy in effect while litigation continues, even as some removed individuals have reportedly faced human rights abuses, including at the CECOT maximum security prison in El Salvador, been sent into life-threatening civil conflict such as South Sudan, or been subsequently repatriated to the very home countries from which they originally fled.
Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights
Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article