Since 2025, immigrants and advocates have raised alarms about a troubling DHS practice showing up in immigration courts across the United States: filing motions to dismiss or otherwise trying to end cases in ways that can fast-track removal—sometimes with the added threat of deporting people to unexpected third countries they’ve never lived in, traveled to, or had any opportunity to prepare fear-based claims against.
For asylum seekers from places like Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Somalia, Ukraine or Russia (and many others), the idea of being sent to a “random” wrong third country—like Uganda—adds a new layer of fear and instability to an already high-stakes process. As of mid-2025, the U.S. has entered agreements or arrangements with several nations to accept third-country deportees, including Mexico, El Salvador, Panama, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, Rwanda, Eswatini, South Sudan, and Kosovo.
On February 25, 2026, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a major decision pushing back on third-country deportation practices and reinforcing core protections for people at risk. The court’s ruling focuses on a basic principle: the government cannot bypass fairness and due process when it tries to remove someone to a country that was never part of their immigration case and was not listed in their removal order.
The decision is especially important for immigrants who are terrified of being transferred—suddenly and without real warning—to a third country where they may face persecution, detention, or torture, and where they may have no community, resources, or legal support.
The court emphasized that people must receive meaningful notice before any third-country removal and must be given a meaningful chance to raise a protection claim specific to that country. In other words, if the government is going to propose a third country, it can’t be a surprise. A person has to have a real opportunity to explain why removal there would be dangerous and to seek protection.
The ruling also reinforced that DHS should not jump straight to third-country removal when there are other identified countries already tied to the person’s case. It recognized that third-country deportations raise serious due process concerns—because fear-based claims are country-specific. Someone may be able to document risk in their home country, but they may not have any time to gather evidence, locate experts, or even understand the conditions in a newly proposed third country before being placed on a plane.
For immigrants navigating asylum or other humanitarian protections, this decision provides an important safeguard and a powerful argument for counsel to use when DHS attempts to move quickly toward removal to a third country. It’s also a reminder that if DHS raises any third-country possibility, that detail matters—and it must be addressed immediately, in writing, with a clear request for the opportunity to pursue country-specific protections.
If you or a loved one is afraid of being deported to the wrong third country—or DHS is trying to dismiss your immigration court case in a way that could lead to rapid removal—get legal help right away. Call Shepelsky Law Group at 718-769-6352 to book your consultation, or schedule it directly at Shepelskylaw.Cliogrow.com/Book