The US is deporting people to countries they have never lived in. Two courts said it was unlawful, and it goes on.

A deportation to someone else's country

When the United States deports someone, the law says where that person goes. Usually it is the country the person names, which is most often the country they come from. If that fails, it is another country they have a link to, such as the place they were born.

The law also allows a last option. If neither of those can work, the government may send the person to any country whose government agrees to take them. That is a third-country deportation. The person may never have lived there and may not speak its language.

Some of the people sent this way had already won an order from a US immigration judge that blocks their return home, where they could be persecuted or tortured. Rights groups and judges ask what happens to them in a country picked for them. A federal court in Boston also ruled that people must get notice of where they are going and a fair chance to say they fear harm there. The government says it has the authority to send people to any country that agrees to take them.

Jamaica's first 22

Jamaica is the newest country to take part. A flight from the United States landed in Kingston on Tuesday 13 October with 22 people: 15 men and seven women from Ecuador and a European country. None were Jamaican. Jamaica rejected one more person, and two others were taken off the list before the flight.

Jamaica's government calls this a transit arrangement. Horace Chang, the minister of national security, pictured below, said the group was given 90-day landing status and handed to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a United Nations agency. The IOM is to send them on to their home countries, which the minister expects within 14 days. The government says the United States pays the costs through the IOM.

The deal is a memorandum of understanding signed with the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in June. Under it, no more than 25 people can arrive every two weeks. If 10 or more of them ask to stay through asylum or another humanitarian process, the arrangement is suspended. The government has not published the text, and opponents and academics in Jamaica have asked to see it. Jamaica has not said what, if anything, it gets in return.

The other deals, and what they cost

Jamaica joins more than 30 countries with formal or informal deals. Liberia agreed in August to take up to 1,200 people. Al Jazeera reports that Washington has committed $124m to Liberian health services, and at one point offered to extend some visas for Liberians from 12 to 36 months. Liberia says the deal is not a quid pro quo. Eswatini, a small kingdom in southern Africa, confirmed that it received $5.1 million under its deal.

Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Senate body that oversees foreign policy and aid, looked at the money in February. They found that more than $32 million had been sent directly to five governments, which by then had taken about 300 people. In some cases that came to more than $1 million per person. One Jamaican man was sent to Eswatini at a cost of more than $181,000. Weeks later the man was flown 7,000 miles back to Jamaica, also at US expense.

Most people sent to a third country go to Mexico. The Migration Policy Institute, a research group in Washington, estimates about 15,000 third-country deportations in 2025, and 13,000 of them went to Mexico (Figure 1). DHS data analysed by Al Jazeera show more than 16,000 from January 2025 to August 2026, which it calls likely an undercount. DHS publishes no total of its own.

A higher count came out after our alert. On 20 October Local 10, a Miami television station, reported that the tracking group Third Country Deportation Watch counts at least 35 countries with agreements and more than 25,000 people sent. We have not seen the tracker's own figures. The tracker builds its count from public reports and records requests, and includes informal deals, so its figure runs higher than the DHS data.

The court fight

The case is called Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. It began in a federal district court in Boston, the first level of the federal courts. In February 2026 that court set aside the DHS guidance for third-country removals. It ruled that the government must first try the countries named in each person's removal order. It also ruled that the guidance failed to give the notice and hearings that the Convention Against Torture requires. The convention is a treaty the United States has signed. It bars sending anyone to a place where they face a real danger of torture.

In September the First Circuit, the appeals court above Boston, upheld that ruling, except the duty to try the named countries first. Two courts have now found the policy unlawful.

The Supreme Court has stepped in twice, and both times it let the deportations go on. In June 2025 it paused an earlier order from the Boston judge. On 29 September 2026 it paused the new rulings and agreed to hear the full case in December. Neither order gave a reason, and the court's three liberal justices dissented.

A pause lets the government keep acting while the court decides. It does not settle whether the guidance is lawful. That ruling comes after the December argument, likely months later. Figure 2 sets out how the policy and the case moved together.

The people sent

Human Rights Watch reported in October that people sent to Eswatini, Ghana and South Sudan were detained without good reason and faced ill-treatment. Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea and Ghana sent some people on to their home countries, where they risked persecution or torture.

Figure 3 shows the African countries that have taken people under these deals.

One case shows what a court can still do. Ahmed Soliman, an Egyptian man who grew up in Arizona, had an order from an immigration judge barring removal to Egypt, where Soliman could be tortured. He was sent to Equatorial Guinea instead. On 6 October John Hinderaker, a federal judge in Arizona appointed by President Trump, ruled that DHS had violated Soliman's right to due process and ordered the government to bring Soliman back. Court filings say Soliman was held under armed guard and beaten. The government says it has begun the process of return.

The government's own account is about deterrence more than numbers. Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, has said that most people offered a third country choose to go home instead, and that this is the most important function of the agreements. When the Supreme Court ruled in September, James Percival, the DHS general counsel, said in a statement: "It's not too late to get $3,000 and a flight home."

What to watch

Until the Supreme Court rules, expect more flights and more partner countries. If the court rules against the government, each transfer would need notice and a chance to raise a fear of torture first. If it rules for the government, the deals stand on firmer legal ground in the United States. Partner countries still face lawsuits at home.

Horace Chang

Minister of National Security and Peace, Jamaica

Confirmed the first group's 90-day landing status and says the people sent are visitors in transit, not deportees.

Marco Rubio

Secretary of State, United States

Says most people offered a third country return home instead, and calls that the main purpose of the deals.

Jeanne Shaheen

Senior Democrat, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Released the committee Democrats' report that found the deals costly and poorly monitored.

• Jamaica's second group. The minister said another flight could come after 14 days, but that there is no guarantee.
• The number of asylum requests in Jamaica. At 10, the arrangement is suspended. The minister says the figure will be given when it becomes significant.
• The Supreme Court argument in December, and the ruling after it.
• New countries that sign up, and whether their deals are published.

Sources

• The Congressional Research Service on removals to third countries, August 2026, for the law.
• SCOTUSblog, 6 October 2026, and NBC News, 29 September 2026, for the Supreme Court orders. The National Immigration Litigation Alliance practice alert for the Boston judgment.
• NY Carib News, The Gleaner and the Jamaica Observer, 14 to 16 October 2026, for the Jamaica arrivals and terms.
• The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democrats and Reuters, 13 February 2026, for the payments. Reuters on Liberia, Eswatini, Rwanda and Ghana. Al Jazeera, 15 October 2026.
• The Migration Policy Institute and Human Rights Watch for the counts and conditions. NPR, 9 October 2026, for the Soliman case. Local 10 News, 20 October 2026, for the newest tracker count.
• Our intel alert AL34 is the fuller version, with its sources cited.