Trump’s departure policy: Justice stops flight from migrants to South Sudan

They came for a better life and obviously landed in the poorest country in the world.

A judge at the Federal Supreme Court in Boston instructed the US government on Tuesday to keep migrants who were on a deportation flight. According to judge Brian Murphy, the plane does not have to reverse. After landing, however, no migrant should leave the machine – only when it has been clarified whether they would have received a proper deportation procedure in the United States.

The absurd: the flight went to the south of South Sudan, a state in East Africa, which has been a fond of years of civil war and famines – the land on earth per capita.

The judicial order actually affects all deportations to third countries, report several US media. Murphy reacted to an urgent application for the lawyers from two migrants from Vietnam and Myanmar, which are said to have been on board the machine. The lawyers of one of the allegedly flowned ones were said to be informed of his deportation until Monday morning. But when she wanted to speak to him, he had already sat on the plane.

The legality of such transfers is highly controversial. If there have been a deportation in the South Sudan, the US government violates an injunction issued by judge Murphy in April, the “”. Anyone who was involved in the deportation against his instruction (civil servants and possibly even the pilots) must expect criminal consequences, he said. “After what was told to me, this seems to be a disregard for the court,” the newspaper quotes him.

The responsible civil servant of the Ministry of Justice did not even want to say to the judge at the apparently completely chaotic hearing on Tuesday how many migrants were on board and where the plane was currently. “I was told that this information is secret,” she said. A colleague of the Ministry of Homeland protection did not want to know anything more precisely. The Boston judge did not accept this – he ordered “” whose bosses, Minister of Homeland Protection Minister Kristi Noem and Minister of Justice Pam Bondi, ordered a hearing on Wednesday.

As absurd as the case sounds – it is only the latest in a number of highly controversial deportation. US President Donald Trump had promised his supporters mass deportations. And he holds his word. It seems that it is what it wants – if necessary, the integrity of the rule of law.

Since Trump’s took office in January, the government has repeatedly complained to ignore proper deportation procedures. The government, in turn, questioned the responsibility of critical judges – some of them even called for their elevation.

The White House increasingly relies on states in the mass deportation on states that include migrants from third countries – “as a favor for us”, as Foreign Minister Marco Rubio formulated. And millions of dollars compensation, as in the EL Salvadors case. “The further away from America, the better so that they cannot come back across the border,” he said. In May there are said to have attempts to deport migrants to Libya, which were stopped by a court.

The current case is reminiscent of a similarly controversial deportation flight in March. At that time, a federal judge had ordered the reversal of an aircraft to bring Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador. The government refused – an unprecedented questionnaire of the separation of powers in the United States.