US appeals court blocks Trump policy allowing rapid deportations to third countries

A federal appeals court unanimously rejected a Trump administration policy permitting rapid deportation of migrants to countries other than their origin on September 18, 2026. The ruling requires the Department of Homeland Security to provide proper notice and opportunity for safety concerns; the policy had sent over 25,000 people to at least 29 third countries.

25 reports · 15 independentinternational · other · us_mainstream

Claim audit

No BS check run yet — press ⚖ to extract this story's claims and verify them against independent sources.

All coverage

Appeals court rejects Trump's third-country deportation policy

stream:bsky-jetstreamother10d ago wire ×4 kagi ↗

Appeals court rejects Trump's third-country deportation policy Politico A unanimous three-judge panel ruled that deporting people to countries in which they have never lived & have no ties must be accompanied by greater due process protections: a meaningful opportunity to contest bit.ly/4y7MeiK

(BFTWH* Politico) Appeals court rejects Trump's third-country deportation policy. A unanimous three-judge panel ruled that deportees must have “a meaningful opportunity to contest” their deportation.

mastodon:mstdn-socialother10d ago kagi ↗

(BFTWH* Politico) Appeals court rejects Trump's third-country deportation policy. A unanimous three-judge panel ruled that deportees must have “a meaningful opportunity to contest” their deportation. *banned from the white house https://www. politico.com/news/2026/09/18/t hird-country-deportations-appeals-court-ruling

Appeals court blocks Trump’s third-country deportation policy

kite:usaother10d ago kagi ↗

The Boston-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on Friday largely upheld a lower-court ruling finding the Trump administration’s third-country deportation policy unlawful. The decision requires immigration officials to give people facing removal effective advance notice of their destination and a meaningful opportunity to challenge the transfer based on safety concerns [washingtonpost