Migrant Deported to Third Country Repatriated to U.S. After Trump Administration Caves to Court Ruling

A Guatemalan man who was deported to Mexico by the Trump administration has been returned to the United States this week, his legal representatives confirmed Thursday. The case marks the first known instance of the administration complying with federal court orders to bring an individual back after a removal based on faulty information.

The man, identified only as O.C.G., arrived in the U.S. via commercial flight after being deported to Mexico in March. His return comes shortly after attorneys for the Justice Department informed U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy that they were arranging transport for O.C.G., acknowledging Murphy's ruling that his removal had occurred without due process or adequate consideration of his expressed fears of persecution.

Judge Murphy found that O.C.G. had not been given the opportunity to challenge his deportation, despite facing credible threats of torture in Mexico. Legal protections under both U.S. and international law require such individuals to be granted a chance to present their fears before removal. In his decision, Murphy highlighted that O.C.G. was previously held for ransom and raped in Mexico—facts that were never evaluated prior to his removal by U.S. authorities.

“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 earlier this month. He criticized the removal process as lacking “any semblance of due process.” Murphy also remarked that returning O.C.G. incurred “a vanishingly small cost to make sure we can still claim to live up to that ideal” of justice.

Federal officials engaged with O.C.G.’s attorneys last weekend and finalized arrangements for his travel back to the United States. While initial plans called for an ICE Air charter, he ultimately returned via a commercial airline on Wednesday. This development comes amid mounting legal battles over the Trump administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, an obscure wartime statute invoked to expedite deportations of certain migrants. Many impacted individuals have been sent to CECOT, El Salvador’s maximum-security prison.

Notably, O.C.G. was not held at CECOT, nor detained in Mexico following his removal. However, his successful return to the U.S. stands in stark contrast to the cases of other migrants for whom federal courts have ordered repatriation, but where the administration has yet to comply—even when administrative errors have been acknowledged.

The Trump administration has not commented on whether it intends to extend compliance to other cases involving wrongful removals. Pressure on federal officials is increasing following a recent order from U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who required the administration to provide all migrants deported to CECOT under the Alien Enemies Act an opportunity to seek habeas relief and to contest the allegations that led to their deportation.

Judge Boasberg’s latest order gives the administration one week to submit a plan for facilitating habeas relief for detainees currently at CECOT. This directive is expected to escalate the ongoing legal feud between federal judges and the administration, which has previously denounced such rulings as the actions of “activist judges.” The dispute reached a new level earlier this year when former President Trump called for Boasberg’s impeachment, triggering a rare public response from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

Within this contentious environment, Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin reiterated the administration’s stance, stating, “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.” As the court battles continue, the fate of other migrants in similar situations remains uncertain, while advocates emphasize the critical importance of due process and the protection of fundamental rights.