联邦法官:特朗普政府的”第三国”驱逐政策违宪 | 福克斯新闻


作者:布雷安妮·德皮施 | 福克斯新闻

发布时间:2026年2月25日 美国东部时间下午2:08

周三,一名联邦法官阻止了特朗普政府在未事先通知非法移民并给予其挑战驱逐机会的情况下,将他们驱逐至所谓”第三国”的行为。这是一起高风险案件,很可能将上诉至最高法院。

这一裁决来自美国地区法官布莱恩·墨菲(Brian Murphy),他是拜登任命的法官。数月前,波士顿的律师提起集体诉讼,质疑美国国土安全部将美国境内非法移民驱逐至所谓”第三国”的流程——即这些国家既非移民的原籍国,也未在其驱逐令中预先指定。

墨菲最终在周三支持了移民一方,裁定国土安全部的第三国驱逐政策违法,并且违反了美国宪法规定的正当法律程序保护。

[image_1]

“本案涉及的是政府是否可以在未通知的情况下,将一个人驱逐到错误的国家,或者一个他很可能遭受迫害或酷刑的国家,从而剥夺该人寻求其本应毫无疑问享有的保护的机会,”墨菲表示。

[image_2]

[image_3]

国土安全部”采取了一项政策,即可以将人员送到未知的地方——所谓的’第三国’,并且只要国土安全部不知道那里有人在等着开枪……那就没问题,”墨菲继续说道。

“这并不好,也不合法,”他说。

国土安全部和司法部均未立即回应福克斯新闻数字版就本案及是否计划上诉该裁决的置评请求。

墨菲还驳回了特朗普政府的主张,即某些非法居住在美国的移民缺乏正当法律程序,他指出,这一条款适用于美国境内的所有”人”,无论其移民身份如何。

“这些是我们的法律,我怀着对出生在美国这个难以置信的幸运的深深感激之情,本法院确认这些法律以及我国的基本原则:即这个国家内的任何’人’都不应在未经正当法律程序的情况下被剥夺生命、自由或财产,”墨菲说。

[image_4]

墨菲将裁决生效时间暂停15天,以便特朗普政府有时间向美国第一巡回上诉法院提起上诉,考虑到法官承认本案的”重要性”和”不同寻常的历史”。

这一裁决是在墨菲主持数月集体诉讼之后作出的,该诉讼由移民提起,质疑将其驱逐至第三国(包括南苏丹、萨尔瓦多、哥斯达黎加和危地马拉)的行为,据报道,政府正在持续进行的驱逐浪潮中已将目光投向这些国家。

“严重不足”:美国法官痛斥特朗普政府延迟提交驱逐信息

[image_5]

华盛顿特区联邦调查局总部大楼,2023年7月3日。(照片来源:Celal Güneş/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

在监督此案期间,他与特朗普政府发生了争执,包括在5月,当时他指责政府未能遵守法院命令,要求其将六名未经正当程序或通知即被驱逐至南苏丹的移民留在美墨边境。

墨菲此前下令将这些移民留在吉布提的一个军事基地,直到他们每个人都能接受”合理恐惧面试”——即有机会向美国官员解释,如果被释放到南苏丹,他们是否害怕遭受迫害或酷刑。

法官的这一命令是联邦法院法官最近一次试图约束特朗普政府继续将移民驱逐至第三国(包括萨尔瓦多和南苏丹)的尝试。

特朗普政府官员曾抨击被驱逐者是”最坏的人”,墨菲此前承认了这些人涉及的犯罪历史。

[image_6]

[image_7]

点击此处获取福克斯新闻应用程序

“法院承认本案涉及的集体成员有犯罪记录,”墨菲在去年的一项裁定中写道。

“但这并不改变正当法律程序的要求,”他写道。”法院以任何致力于法治的人都应理解的严肃态度对待其遵守这些原则的义务。”

与此同时,白宫官员抨击所谓的”激进”法官试图推行政治议程,并多次否认非法移民无权获得正当法律程序的说法。

下级法院法官多次裁定,特朗普政府因未通知移民即将被驱逐,或未给予他们在法庭上挑战驱逐的机会而违反了正当法律程序——自特朗普上任以来,最高法院四次以狭义的方式重申了这一观点。

特朗普政府方面,去年在另一起最高法院案件中取得成功,该案件缩小了联邦法院发布所谓阻止行政命令生效的全国性禁令的能力。

相关文章

[image_8]

纽约和德克萨斯州联邦法官在最高法院裁决后阻止特朗普驱逐令

布雷安妮·德皮施是福克斯新闻数字版的全国政治记者,负责报道特朗普政府,重点关注司法部、联邦调查局和其他全国性新闻。她此前曾在《华盛顿 examiner》和《华盛顿邮报》报道全国政治,此外还为《政治杂志》、《科罗拉多公报》等撰写文章。您可以通过Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com向她提供线索,或在X平台上关注她@breanne_dep。

(注:原文中的图片占位符[image_1]至[image_8]均保留原样,未进行翻译处理。)

Federal judge: Trump’s ‘third country’ deportation policy is unconstitutional | Fox News

By Breanne Deppisch | Fox News

Published February 25, 2026 2:08pm EST

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from deporting illegal immigrants to so-called “third countries” without first giving them notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal, in a high-stakes case that is likely headed to the Supreme Court.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee, comes months after lawyers filed a class-action lawsuit in Boston challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s process of deporting illegal immigrants in the U.S. to so-called “third countries” — countries that are not their home country and were not previously designated in their removal orders.

Murphy ultimately sided with the migrants Wednesday, ruling that DHS’s third-country removal policy is unlawful and violates due process protections under the U.S. Constitution.

[image_1]

“This case is about whether the government may, without notice, deport a person to the wrong country, or a country where he is likely to be persecuted, or tortured, thereby depriving that person of the opportunity to seek protections to which he would be undisputedly entitled,” Murphy said.

[image_2]

President Donald Trump wrote a letter that will be sent to migrants who legally obtained citizenship.(Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Department of Homeland Security “has adopted a policy whereby it may take people and drop them off in parts unknown — in so-called ‘third countries,’ and, ‘as long as the Department doesn’t already know that there’s someone standing there waiting to shoot . . . that’s fine,’” Murphy continued.

“It is not fine, nor is it legal,” he said.

Neither DHS nor DOJ immediately responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment on the case or whether it plans to appeal the ruling.

Murphy also rejected the Trump administration’s claim that certain migrants living in the U.S. illegally lacked due process, noting that the clause applies to all “persons” within the U.S., regardless of immigration status.

“These are our laws, and it is with profound gratitude for the unbelievable luck of being born in the United States of America that this Court affirms these and our nation’s bedrock principle: that no ‘person’ in this country may be ‘deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,’” Murphy said.

[image_3]

Murphy stayed the ruling from taking force for 15 days to allow the Trump administration time to appeal the case to the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, given what the judge acknowledged was the “importance” and “unusual history” of the case in question.

The ruling comes after Murphy presided for months over a class-action lawsuit filed by migrants challenging deportations to third countries, including South Sudan and El Salvador, as well as Costa Rica and Guatemala, which the administration has reportedly eyed in its ongoing wave of deportations.

‘WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT’: US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO

[image_4]

Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters building in Washington D.C., United States on July 3, 2023. (Photo by Celal Güneş/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)(Getty Images)

He has sparred with the Trump administration while overseeing the case, including in May, when he accused the administration of failing to comply with a court order requiring it to keep in U.S. custody six migrants who were deported to South Sudan without due process or notice.

Murphy previously ordered that the migrants remain in U.S. custody at a military base in Djibouti until each of them could be given a “reasonable fear interview,” or a chance to explain to U.S. officials any fear of persecution or torture, should they be released into South Sudanese custody.

The judge’s order is the latest attempt by federal court judges to rein in the Trump administration as it continues to deport migrants to third countries, including El Salvador and South Sudan.

Murphy previously acknowledged the criminal histories in question after Trump officials blasted the individuals removed as the “worst of the worst.”

[image_5]

[image_6]

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“The court recognizes that the class members at issue here have criminal histories,” Murphy wrote in an order last year.

“But that does not change due process,” he wrote. “The court treats its obligation to these principles with the seriousness that anyone committed to the rule of law should understand.”

White House officials, meanwhile, have blasted so-called “activist” judges as attempting to enact a political agenda, and have repeatedly rejected the notion that illegal immigrants are not entitled to due process.

Lower court judges have repeatedly ruled that the Trump administration has violated due process by failing to notify migrants of their imminent removals, or afford them the opportunity to challenge their deportations in court — a view reiterated, albeit narrowly, by the Supreme Court four separate times since Trump took office.

The Trump administration, for its part, succeeded in a separate Supreme Court case last year that narrowed the ability of federal courts to issue so-called nationwide injunctions blocking executive orders from taking force.

Related Article

[image_7]

Federal judges in New York and Texas block Trump deportations after SCOTUS ruling

Breanne Deppisch is a national politics reporter for Fox News Digital covering the Trump administration, with a focus on the Justice Department, FBI and other national news. She previously covered national politics at the Washington Examiner and The Washington Post, with additional bylines in Politico Magazine, the Colorado Gazette and others. You can send tips to Breanne at Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com, or follow her on X at @breanne_dep.

评论

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注