Federal judge refuses to reconsider order to facilitate deportee’s return to US
A federal judge denied a request from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to reconsider his order calling for the Trump administration “to take all immediate steps” to return a Guatemalan deportee to the U.S.
The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts comes after he issued a ruling last week saying that the removal of the individual – identified only as O.C.G. – “lacked due process.”
“In general, this case presents no special facts or legal circumstances, only the banal horror of a man being wrongfully loaded onto a bus and sent back to a country where he was allegedly just raped and kidnapped,” Murphy wrote Friday.
“Defendants are hereby ORDERED to take all immediate steps, including coordinating with Plaintiffs’ counsel, to facilitate the return of O.C.G. to the United States,” he added.
US JUDGE ACCUSES TRUMP ADMIN OF ‘MANUFACTURING CHAOS’ IN SOUTH SUDAN DEPORTATIONS, ESCALATING FEUD
In the filing, Murphy described O.C.G. as a native and citizen of Guatemala who first entered the U.S. “without proper authorization” in March 2024.
“O.C.G. alleges that he presented himself for asylum at the border and was denied an interview. In any event, he was deported shortly thereafter to Guatemala. In April 2024, O.C.G. decided to try again and crossed Mexico on his way to the United States. There, he was raped and held hostage until a family member paid ransom,” the filing said.
READ THE JUDGE’S ORDER – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:
“In May 2024, O.C.G. again arrived at the United States and was arrested by Border Patrol. This time, however, he was referred to an asylum officer after expressing fear of return to Guatemala. That officer determined that O.C.G. had a credible fear of persecution or torture and initiated withholding-only proceedings, where an immigration judge agreed and determined that it was more likely than not that O.C.G. would be persecuted or tortured if sent back to Guatemala. Accordingly, O.C.G. was granted withholding of removal from Guatemala,” it continued.
“Two days after being granted withholding of removal, and with no advanced warning, O.C.G. was put on a bus and sent to Mexico. According to O.C.G., he begged the officers to let him call his attorney but was refused,” according to the filing.
“In Mexico, O.C.G. was given the option of being detained indefinitely while trying to obtain asylum there — a country where he has consistently maintained that he faces a significant risk of violence — or of being sent back to Guatemala — the very country from which an immigration judge awarded him withholding from removal due to the risk of persecution that he faced. O.C.G. chose Guatemala. He remains there today,” Murphy said in the filing.
“Just yesterday, O.C.G. submitted a declaration informing the Court of his current status. He reports living in constant fear of his attackers, being unable to leave the place where he is staying, not being able to rely on the police to protect him, and not being able to see his mother for fear of exposing her to violence, among other hardships,” Murphy also wrote.
DHS said in response to the decision that “America’s asylum system was never intended to be used as a de facto amnesty program or a catch-all, get-out-of-deportation-free card.
“The person in question was an illegally present alien who was granted withholding of removal to Guatemala. He was instead removed to Mexico, a safe third option for him, pending his asylum claim. Yet, this federal activist judge is ordering us to bring him back, so he can have an opportunity to prove why he should be granted asylum to a country that he has had no past connection to,” the department wrote on X in response to a news article about Murphy’s decision.
“The Trump administration is committed to returning our asylum system to its original intent,” it declared.
MARYLAND REP. IVEY BACK FROM EL SALVADOR AFTER FAILING TO MEET KILMAR ABREGO GARCIA
The order from Murphy to return O.C.G. came in response to a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of him and three other plaintiffs, identified as immigrants from Cuba, Ecuador and Honduras who are residents of Massachusetts and Texas.
“Plaintiffs and proposed class members are noncitizens with final removal orders resulting from proceedings in which they have been notified that they could be deported to a designated country of removal (usually their country of origin) and, in some cases, an alternative country of removal (usually a country of which they are a citizen or in which they hold status) and had an opportunity to contest removal to the designated country based on a claim of fear,” read a complaint filed in March.
“They bring this class action to challenge the policy or practice of the Department of Homeland Security of deporting, or seeking to deport, them to a third country — a country never designated for removal — without first providing them with notice or opportunity to contest removal on the basis that they have a fear of persecution, torture, and even death if deported to that third country,” the complaint added.
“DHS’ policy or practice of failing to afford these basic, minimal protections violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the treaty obligations of the United States,” it also said.
About The Author
