US Supreme Court: Previews Argument in Third-Country Migrant Removal Case

For the third time, the Supreme Court will soon hear argument about the federal government’s power to send migrants to countries where they have no ties. And for the third time, the justices are unlikely to focus on what matters most to the migrants who claim the Trump administration is violating the law – whether they will be persecuted, tortured, or killed. Instead, the court is likely to turn its attention to a much more technical issue: whether courts can force the government to let migrants explain why forced removal might mean almost-certain persecution.In Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., scheduled for oral argument on Dec. 9, the court will review the Trump administration’s policy of removing migrants from the United States to any country that will accept them. The Immigration and Nationality Act permits so-called third-country removals under certain circumstances. After an immigration judge has ordered a migrant removed, immigration officials must first attempt to send the person to the country that they choose, where they hold citizenship, or last resided. If none of those countries accepts the migrant, officials can then send the person to a country that will take them in, so long as they are not sent to a country where they face likely persecution or torture.Last year, the Trump administration revamped the government’s third-country removal process to quickly send more migrants to countries where they have no ties. Cuban citizen D.V.D., who receives treat