New ICE Memo Could Enable Rapid Deportation to Third Countries

In a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency issued a memo on July 9, 2025, allowing for the expedited deportation of migrants to 'third countries' without prior assurances of their safety. This policy, described as effective immediately, raises serious concerns regarding the potential for human rights violations, particularly torture and persecution, as individuals may be deported with as little as six hours' notice.

The memo, authored by Todd Lyons, Acting Director of ICE, outlines the new procedures under which immigrants, including those with final orders of removal, may be sent to countries where they have no prior connections. This includes instances where U.S. officials have not received credible diplomatic assurances that the deportees will not face harm in their destination countries. The directives permit ICE officers to act swiftly in 'exigent circumstances,' further complicating the legal protections traditionally afforded to migrants.

Critics of the policy have expressed alarm over its implications for due process. Trina Realmuto, Executive Director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, stated that the memo disregards existing legal requirements and fails to provide a meaningful process for individuals facing deportation. Realmuto highlighted that the policy appears to lack transparency regarding which countries have been deemed safe for deportation and the terms of those agreements. She remarked, “The policy is woefully deficient, providing only 6 to 24 hours' notice, which is insufficient for individuals to assess their risk or seek legal counsel.”

The policy follows a controversial Supreme Court ruling that upheld the administration's authority to deport migrants to countries with which they have no connection. Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in her dissent that the ruling could lead to severe consequences for thousands of individuals, stating, “the majority is rewarding lawlessness by allowing the administration to violate immigrants’ due process rights.”

Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin of the Department of Homeland Security defended the new policy, asserting that it is essential for national security and public safety. She stated, “We have successfully negotiated nearly a dozen safe third country agreements,” emphasizing the administration's commitment to expelling 'the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens.'

The ramifications of this policy extend beyond individual cases, raising broader questions about the U.S. government's role in human rights protections for migrants. As the situation evolves, advocates for immigrant rights are likely to continue challenging these measures in court, arguing that they undermine both domestic and international obligations to protect vulnerable populations.

The legal landscape surrounding immigration enforcement remains precarious, with numerous stakeholders advocating for comprehensive reform. As the Biden administration navigates this contentious issue, the potential for conflict between immigration policy and human rights advocacy appears poised to intensify in the coming months. The implications for the future of U.S. immigration policy, particularly regarding the treatment of migrants, remain uncertain as legal challenges and public scrutiny mount.