Judge Halts Potential Deportation Flights to Libya, Saudi Arabia Over Notification Concerns

A federal judge has intervened to potentially block deportation flights to Libya and Saudi Arabia, citing the Trump administration’s failure to provide advance notification to the affected immigrants and their legal representatives. Judge Brian E. Murphy’s ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to existing court orders designed to protect the rights of non-citizens facing removal. The administration, while not officially confirming plans for such flights, is facing mounting pressure from immigration lawyers and scrutiny over alleged preparations for these deportations.

The core issue revolves around a prior court order, specifically an April 18, 2025 Preliminary Injunction, and its subsequent April 30, 2025 Amendment. Judge Murphy’s order mandates that any third-country removals must be preceded by written notification to both the non-citizen and their legal counsel, presented in a language the individual understands. Crucially, the order also grants the non-citizen a "meaningful opportunity" to raise fear-based claims for protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

The amendment to the injunction further clarifies that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) cannot circumvent the court’s mandate by delegating its immigration responsibilities to other agencies, including the Department of Defense. Judge Murphy emphasized that any imminent removals, as reported by news agencies and corroborated by class-member accounts and public information, would constitute a clear violation of his order.

The legal challenge was brought forth by immigration attorneys representing individuals from countries including Vietnam, Laos, and the Philippines. These attorneys asserted that their clients were informed by immigration enforcement agents of impending deportation to Libya or Saudi Arabia. They sought a temporary restraining order to prevent non-citizen removals to third countries without prior written notice and the opportunity to raise fear-based claims.

The attorneys argued that deporting individuals to Libya without allowing them to claim CAT protection would directly violate the existing court order. They cited reports indicating that Laotian, Vietnamese, and Philippine immigrants were being prepared for removal to Libya, a country known for its human rights violations, especially concerning migrant residents. They alleged that these class members were being scheduled for removal without receiving the required notice and opportunity to apply for CAT protection.

Adding to the urgency, the attorneys pointed to a CNN report citing publicly available information indicating a C-17 flight scheduled to depart from Kelly Field in San Antonio, Texas, to Misrata Airport in Libya. The Associated Press also quoted a U.S. official, speaking anonymously, about alleged plans to fly migrants to Libya on a military plane.

While the Trump administration has remained tight-lipped about the specifics of these alleged deportation plans, the reports have generated significant concern and raised questions about compliance with legal and human rights obligations.

Libya itself has denied any formal agreement with the U.S. regarding the reception of migrants. The Tripoli-based government of Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah stated that there was "no deal or coordination" with the U.S. However, the statement alluded to the possibility of "some parallel parties" agreeing to receive migrants. This appears to refer to the rival administration in eastern Libya, controlled by military commander Khalifa Hifter. The Hifter-led Libya National Army also issued a statement denying any deal or understanding to receive migrants from the U.S.

The existence of two competing administrations in Libya, each backed by different armed groups and foreign governments, adds a layer of complexity to the situation. It raises questions about which entity, if any, would be responsible for the well-being and protection of deported migrants.

President Donald Trump, when questioned about the issue, directed inquiries to the Department of Homeland Security. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, during a news conference, stated that she "can’t confirm" media reports of plans to send people to Libya. The State Department also declined to comment on the details of diplomatic communications with other governments.

The Trump administration has previously expressed its intention to explore third countries for deportations. The administration has deported individuals to Panama and Costa Rica who were not citizens of those countries. This approach raises concerns about the human rights implications of sending individuals to countries where they may face persecution or lack adequate legal protections. The situation also highlights the administration’s broader immigration policies, which have been characterized by stricter enforcement and a focus on deterring illegal immigration.

Judge Murphy’s intervention underscores the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that immigration enforcement actions comply with legal and constitutional safeguards. The case highlights the ongoing tension between the government’s efforts to enforce immigration laws and the rights of individuals facing deportation. The court’s emphasis on the need for proper notification and the opportunity to raise fear-based claims reflects a commitment to due process and the protection of vulnerable populations. The situation remains fluid, with potential for further legal challenges and scrutiny of the administration’s deportation policies.