By: Sahra Mohamed
On June 24, the U.S. Supreme Court lifted an injunction blocking the Trump administration from deporting migrants to third countries, places many asylum seekers have no prior ties. The ruling has ignited a debate about the limits of executive power, the independence of the judiciary, and what it means to seek asylum in a supposedly democratic nation. The legal justification for this action? An outdated law from more than two centuries ago: The Alien Enemies Act of 1798. This act allows the U.S. government to detain or deport nationals from countries deemed hostile during times of war. It’s unusual that it’s being invoked against asylum seekers in today’s world. The Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t come without resistance. Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the decision could enable the government to send vulnerable people “to countries where they may face persecution or death.” Reuters confirmed that several of these deportations have already begun, including flights to countries like Djibouti, nations with limited infrastructure to support incoming migrants.
The legal standoff took another turn on June 24, 2025 when the Trump administration publicly accused U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who had issued the original pause on deportations of “unprecedented defiance” of the Supreme Court. According to Reuters, the filing criticized Murphy for maintaining his block on the deportations to South Sudan, despite the Court’s prior decision. Under the new rules, migrants may be deported to countries like El Salvador, Honduras, and Djibouti, even if they’ve never lived there and face serious risks of harm. The UNHCR warns that this kind of deportation undermines the 1951 Refugee Convention, to which the U.S. is a party. Some of those removed include Venezuelan families fleeing political persecution and children separated from their parents. In many cases, migrants never had the chance to present their cases in court. Instead, they were held in remote detention centers, given brief interviews, and processed under expedited procedures that bypass normal asylum protocols. An investigation by ProPublica revealed that some deportees, including Venezuelan and Central American migrants, were sent to El Salvador, where they faced harsh prison conditions and were treated as criminals, even without prior convictions. Others were unaware of where they were being sent and had no ties to the receiving country, arriving with no legal aid, no family, and no access to resources.
While the Trump administration intensifies its domestic deportation policies, international tensions are escalating in the Middle East. On June 22, 2025, the United States, in coordination with Israel, launched airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. These strikes, part of Operation Midnight Hammer, were meant to dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. President Trump declared the mission a success, stating that Iran would not be building nuclear weapons “for a very long time.” However, a report published on June 24, 2025 later cited U.S. intelligence indicating the strikes had failed to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites. Iran suffered blackouts and fuel shortages in the aftermath. The Israeli government has also continued what the South African High Court has officially recognized as a genocide in Gaza. The United Nations has declared the situation in Gaza a severe humanitarian crisis, with over 55,000 people dead amid ongoing conflict, as detailed by NPR. In Ottawa, Prime Minister Mark Carney urged caution and emphasized the importance of de-escalation in the Middle East, following a joint G7 statement on June 16, 2025, as reported by CBC News. On June 22, 2025, Carney posted on X, advocating for peaceful dialogue in the Middle East to prevent further escalation. He also expressed support for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Meanwhile, some Canadian lawmakers are questioning whether increased military tension should prompt tighter immigration controls or changes to the Safe Third Country Agreement. As these global conflicts continue, the question remains: will Canada respond by taking a clear stand in defense of due process and human rights? These ongoing attacks show how complex and inhumane U.S. domestic policies and international conflicts have become. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow deportations to third countries, many of which asylum seekers have never lived in has raised serious legal and humanitarian concerns, as vulnerable migrants face expedited deportations without proper court hearings. As Canada navigates these issues in light of changing U.S policies, questions remain about its role in upholding human rights globally and protecting asylum seekers within its borders.
Leave a Reply