In a significant legal development, a federal judge appointed by President Biden has now reportedly issued an order that appears to contradict a recent Supreme Court ruling regarding the deportation of migrants.
The ruling, which was handed down just hours before the judge’s order, allows the Trump administration to expedite the deportation of undocumented migrants to countries not specified in their removal orders.
The Supreme Court’s decision effectively paused an injunction issued by Judge Brian Murphy, which mandated that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provide migrants with notice and an opportunity to raise concerns about potential threats of torture before deportation.
Despite this ruling, Murphy moved forward on Monday evening to block the immediate removal of eight migrants held at a U.S. naval base in Djibouti, who were slated for deportation to South Sudan.
In his order, Murphy referenced a prior ruling from May 21, asserting that the Trump administration had violated his preliminary injunction.
He cited Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion, which suggested that Murphy’s remedial orders were not properly before the Court, as the government had not appealed them nor sought a stay pending an appeal.
The eight migrants involved in this case argued that they were being deprived of essential procedural rights and access to protections mandated by both Congress and the Constitution.
They warned that without immediate relief, they faced imminent deportation to a country characterized by instability, where they could encounter severe risks of torture and indefinite detention.
The ruling has sparked a heated response from the political sphere. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, appearing on Fox News, criticized the judge’s decision, suggesting it was an act of defiance against the Supreme Court.
He called for accountability, stating, “Expect fireworks tomorrow as we hold this judge accountable for refusing to obey the Supreme Court.”
Sotomayor, in her dissent, expressed concern about the Supreme Court’s intervention in what she deemed a high-stakes litigation.
She argued that the lower courts should manage these cases with the care they require, rather than having the Supreme Court intervene to grant emergency relief to the government.
As this legal battle unfolds, the implications for immigration policy and the judicial system remain significant, highlighting the ongoing tensions between different branches of government over immigration enforcement and the rights of migrants.
[READ MORE: Adam Schiff Throws Cold Water on AOC’s Impeachment Push]
