Trump’s latest deportation scheme is almost certainly illegal

President Donald Trump is looking to additional faraway countries to deport immigrants — another escalation of his immigration crackdown.

He has already sent immigrants to an El Salvador megaprison that is notorious for human rights abuses. Those deported include Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the government admits it wrongfully sent to El Salvador and has so far refused to return to the US.

The Washington Post reported Tuesday that, as part of negotiations to end Russia’s war on Ukraine, Trump also pressured Ukraine to take US deportees. It has yet to do so, and it’s not clear that the proposal remains under consideration.  

The US is reportedly in talks with Rwanda to deport immigrants to the country, which has a poor record on human rights under its current president, Paul Kagame.

Now, Trump is also reportedly planning to send immigrants to Libya. The administration has not publicly described the specifics of its plans, and both of Libya’s rival governments have denied they’d agreed to accept migrants.

That’s despite Libya’s record of human rights abuses in its immigrant detention centers and exploitation of migrants by human traffickers.

For those reasons, sending immigrants to Libya would be, according to legal experts, a clear violation of US and international law.

“I have the same concerns that I think we all have about all the disappearances, which is that they’re just rounding up people kind of willy-nilly, without regard for who they are, whether they have cancer, whether they’re US citizens, whether they can’t remove them,” said Becca Heller, co-founder and director of the International Refugee Assistance Project. “They’re sending them to these black sites overseas, and then claiming that they can’t get them back.”

What we know about Trump’s plans

Trump administration officials said on Tuesday that deportation flights to Libya could begin as soon as Wednesday, multiple outlets reported. 

It’s not clear how many, what nationalities they may represent, or whether they have been afforded any kind of process to challenge their deportations in the US. The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for further information on Wednesday.

Lawyers for immigrants from Laos, Vietnam, and the Philippines asked a federal judge this week to prevent their clients from being sent to Libya before they had a chance to challenge their deportations in court. The attorneys claimed that, based on what their clients had told them, the immigrants were at risk of being sent to Libya in apparent violation of an earlier court order.

US District Judge Brian Murphy ruled Wednesday that, if the media reports about the planned Libya deportations are correct, the plan “blatantly defies” the court order, which requires that immigrants be granted written notice of their deportation and a “meaningful” opportunity to appeal. 

Neither of Libya’s warring government factions appears to be in on Trump’s plans, either. Both the internationally recognized government in Libya’s capital of Tripoli and warlord Khalifa Hiftar’s authorities in the eastern part of the country denied striking any agreements with the US to accept its deportees on Wednesday. 

It’s also not clear what legal authority, if any, Trump might be invoking to deport immigrants to Libya. Federal courts have temporarily blocked the administration from invoking an 18th-century wartime law known as the Alien Enemies Act to find people eligible for deportation without a final removal order from an immigration judge. Trump, however, has already ignored a court order and could do so again.

But even if Trump has the authority to deport certain migrants, sending them to Libya, with its horrific record of abuse, is illegal. 

Sending immigrants to Libya would violate US and international law

It’s illegal to forcibly send immigrants to places where they will face persecution and danger. Under both US and international law — including the Convention Against Torture and a 1967 protocol implementing the Refugee Convention — this is what’s called the principle of “non-refoulement.”

Sending immigrants to Libya would violate this cornerstone of human rights law because the country, a major transit hub for migrants trying to reach Europe from Africa and the Middle East, is by no means safe. The country has been embroiled in conflict since the country’s authoritarian leader Muammar Gaddafi was killed in 2011 as part of a NATO-backed revolution. 

“Libya doesn’t even have a national government,” Heller said. “It has two competing [government] entities and a very clearly documented history of torturing and abusing migrants and refugees whom it detains.”

Libya has long been part of a migrant corridor to Europe, providing access via the Mediterranean Sea. As of 2022, the United Nations estimated that there were almost 700,000 migrants stranded in Libya as Europe strengthened its border controls.

Human traffickers have subjected immigrants in Libya to beatings, rape, torture, forced labor, and extortion. Those intercepted on their way to Europe have been held in Libyan detention centers where they have suffered similar abuses.

In 2024 alone, the United Nations documented 965 migrant deaths and disappearances in Libya.

Trump tried something like this before during his first administration. He brokered what he called “safe third country” agreements under which the US could send asylum seekers to countries including Guatemala. As is the case with Libya, immigrant advocates argued at the time that none of those countries could be considered safe and that in attempting to remove immigrants to those countries, the US was violating the principle of non-refoulement. 

“They’re all just ways to have a reign of terror over migrants for an end that I don’t completely understand,” Heller said. “It doesn’t appear to have anything to do, actually, with border security or with law enforcement.”

Related articles

Greater East Buffalo Family of Parishes Bulletin for 10/26/2025

Please support the neighborhood churches. Click here to view the latest bulletin—>

GOP aide threatened to sic Trump on journalist if story wasn’t killed: report



A communications director working for the North Carolina Republican Party threatened a reporter, according to a new ProPublica report.

In a report about a North Carolina Supreme Court judge using "his perch" as "an instrument of political power," it was revealed that political leaders were eager to defend him.

Judge Paul Newby, who won his 2020 race, "supported changes to judicial oversight, watering it down and bringing it under his court’s control, making himself and his fellow justices less publicly accountable," the report said.

However, ProPublica's report recounted efforts by its reporters to secure details not only from the judge but also from his allies. At one point, the site requested an in-person interview while at an event. The reporter was "escorted out of a judicial conference to avoid questions."

The court's communications and media team also refused to respond. Still, the site "interviewed over 70 people who know him professionally or personally, including former North Carolina justices and judges, lawmakers, longtime friends and family members."

When the site reached out to Newby's daughter, the Republican Party stepped in personally.

"The North Carolina Republican Party’s communications director, Matt Mercer, responded," the report continued. Newby's daughter is the state party's finance director.

ProPublica was accused of waging a “jihad” against the “NC Republicans.” He refused to dignify questions with "any comments whatsoever.”

It then took a darker turn.

“I’m sure you’re aware of our connections with the Trump Administration and I’m sure they would be interested in this matter. I would strongly suggest dropping this story," Mercer threatened in an email to ProPublica with emphasis on the word "strongly."

The reporters didn't drop the story, and it appeared on the site on Thursday.

Newby isn't up for reelection until 2028.

Graham Platner’s new campaign manager leaves operation after joining just days ago

The departure is the latest in a string of shakeups for the embattled Senate candidate.

Marjorie Taylor Greene calls for government ‘overthrow’: ‘It rapes you every single day’



Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) suggested that "forgotten" Americans should "overthrow" the government.

During a Wednesday interview with a podcaster named Shipwreck, Greene said the American people "have forgotten their power."

"I call them the forgotten American man and woman," she explained. "That is the largest group of Americans. And I think, in my opinion, that is the most powerful group of Americans."

"They could rein in their government like that. Not only could they rein it in, they could overthrow it," she remarked. "That's about 100 million Americans, right?"

"Let's say 100 million Americans that say, f-- you to the government and refuse to pay their taxes. This is how to do it."

Greene insisted that "the federal government has [screwed] you over."

"It rapes you every single day," she insisted. "Social Security, you pay in and your Social Security check, and your employer matches it for all these years, and you retire and you get like a diddly $1,500 a month. I mean, that is such a pathetic joke."

"So when I tell you, look, I am dead serious about the American people," the lawmaker added. "If they really wanted to, everybody I work with, all of my colleagues, everybody in the government, they would be terrified to talk to a lobbyist or talk to a foreign government or they would be terrified to, to step out of line if the American people got serious about forcing Congress and the Senate and the administration, no matter who's serving, to serve them, serve the people."

November 2025

Political cartoons from the desk of Matt Wuerker