Subsequent Trump and Court Action(s)

• March 23, 2025

  2025.03.23 Class Action Complaint - D.V.D. v U.S. Department of Homeland Security

  Four individuals with final removal orders filed a national class action in the District of Massachusetts challenging DHS’s policy of deporting noncitizens to third countries without notice and the opportunity to raise fear-based claims. The lawsuit claims that the email directive sent by ICE on February 18 "magnified the practical impact" of DHS's new policy of removing noncitizens to third countries by "instruct[ing] DHS officers to review all cases of individuals previously released from immigration detention – including those who have complied with the terms of their release for years, even decades – for re-detention and removal to a third country."

  Plaintiffs argue this violates "basic procedural protections" and denies noncitizens the "opportunity to present a fear-based claim." Moreover, plaintiffs claim the policy puts lives at risk, pointing to cases like O.C.G., who was deported to Mexico despite evidence of previous persecution. The lawsuit seeks to block DHS from carrying out these removals without basic procedural safeguards. D.V.D. v U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-10676 (D.Mass.)

  **Litigation entries are limited to initial complaints and major substantive rulings. For pleadings and additional information, use name and docket number to search Civil Rights Clearinghouse and CourtListener or visit Just Security Litigation Tracker**

  View Document
• March 28, 2025

  2025.03.28 TRO - D.V.D v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

  District Court Judge Brian E. Murphy granted a temporary restraining order barring the Trump administration from deporting any person to a country they are not a national of without written notice and a "meaningful opportunity" to apply for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture in the U.S.. D.V.D. v U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-10676 (D. Mass.)

  **See litigation note above**

  View Document
• March 30, 2025

  2025.03.30 DHS Guidance Regarding Third Country Removals

  Subsequent to the TRO issued in the D.V.D. litigation, DHS Secretary Noem issued guidance on removing noncitizens with a final order of removal to a third country not previously designated as the country of removal. Under the guidance, noncitizens may be removed to a third country "without the need for further procedures" if that country has provided credible "diplomatic assurances" that noncitizens removed there "will not be persecuted or tortured."

  Immigration officers are instructed to "inform the alien of removal to that country" and not "affirmatively ask whether the alien is afraid of being removed to that country." Any noncitizen that affirmatively states a fear of removal to a third country without being asked will be referred to USCIS for reasonable fear screening. If USCIS determines that a noncitizen "will more likely than not be persecuted on a statutorily protected ground or tortured in the country of removal," he/she may be referred to the immigration court. If he/she was previously in proceedings before the immigration court, ICE can move to reopen the proceedings, or alternatively, "choose to designate another country for removal."

  This memorandum was produced in D.V.D. v. Dep't. of Homeland Sec., 1:25-cv-10676-BEM (D. Mass.).

  View Document
• April 18, 2025

  2025.04.18 Preliminary Injunction - D.V.D. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

  District Court Judge Brian E. Murphy granted class certification to the plaintiffs and issued a preliminary injunction in D.V.D. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-10676 (D. Mass.). The court ordered that before removing any noncitizen to a third country that is not provided for on the noncitizen’s order of removal issued in proceedings under INA Sections 240, 241(a)(5), or 238(b), the government must: (1) provide written notice to the noncitizen (and counsel, if any) of the third country to which the noncitizen may be removed, in a language that the noncitizen can understand; (2) provide meaningful opportunity for the noncitizen to raise a fear of return for eligibility for CAT protections; (3) move to reopen the proceedings if the noncitizen demonstrates “reasonable fear”; and (4) if the noncitizen is not found to have demonstrated “reasonable fear,” provide meaningful opportunity, and a minimum of 15 days, for the noncitizen to seek to move to reopen immigration proceedings to challenge the potential third-country removal.

  **See litigation note above**

  View Document