DHS v. D.V.D.

Background

The dispute involves the Department of Homeland Security and migrants facing removal to third countries. The case began when a Guatemalan man who had been found likely to face torture was escorted to Mexico without a new removal order or advance notice. Plaintiffs filed a class action seeking court orders to require written notice and a meaningful chance to raise protections under the Convention Against Torture. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order and then a preliminary injunction enforcing those notice and process requirements.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Government should be allowed to continue carrying out so-called third-country removals while the appeal proceeds. The Supreme Court granted the Government’s emergency request and stayed the District Court’s April 18 preliminary injunction pending the First Circuit appeal and any timely petition for Supreme Court review. Lower courts had previously denied emergency relief, and the stay will end automatically if certiorari is denied or when a final judgment is sent down if certiorari is granted. A dissenting Justice protested the stay, noting repeated removals that she said violated court orders.

Real world impact

The stay lets the Government continue removals to countries such as Mexico, El Salvador, Libya, and South Sudan while appeals continue. Migrants who might otherwise get written notice and a clear chance to raise fears of torture now face removals during ongoing litigation. The order is temporary and could end if the Supreme Court declines further review or after final judgment.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Sotomayor (joined by two colleagues) dissented, arguing the Government repeatedly violated lower-court orders, that the stay rewards noncompliance, and that the decision risks exposing people to torture and undermines respect for court orders.