Attorneys have had no contact with migrants held at military base in Djibouti, groups tell Supreme Court
A group of migrants that the Trump's administration has been holding on a military base in Djibouti have been unable to contact their attorneys, immigrant rights groups told the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The detainees, who were initially bound for South Sudan, are part of a high-profile emergency appeal pending at the Supreme Court over the administration's effort to remove migrants to places other than their homeland. Lower courts have required officials to provide those migrants additional notice and an opportunity to claim a fear of being tortured.
Groups representing the migrants, including the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in a new brief that officials had 'set up a private interview room' on the base but that 'to date, counsel have not heard from them.'
The migrants, the groups said, 'are stranded incommunicado in Djibouti, a country of which they have no knowledge, and en route to another country, South Sudan, where none have ever set foot and which remains engulfed in ongoing and intensifying armed conflict.'
The Supreme Court has repeatedly sided with Trump amid a flurry of emergency cases that have reached its docket since the president returned to power. One issue on which the White House has not fared as well has been immigration, particularly in situations where due process concerns have been raised. The high court notably barred the administration last month from deporting other migrants under the 1789 Alien Enemies Act without more notice and a chance to have their cases reviewed.
After a group of migrants facing deportation to countries other than their homeland sued over the administration's process, US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Joe Biden appointee, in March blocked officials from carrying out those removals without offering written notice and giving the targeted immigrants a chance to demonstrate they have a credible fear of persecution or torture in that other country.
Murphy later said that the Trump administration 'unquestionably' violated his court order when it tried to transfer detainees to South Sudan.
The Trump administration has argued Murphy's requirements are not included in federal law, and DHS officials have claimed they already have procedures in place to ensure that migrants are not persecuted in a third country. They have also described the migrants facing removal to South Sudan as having deep criminal records.
But the attorneys representing the migrants at the Supreme Court pushed back on that assertion.
The administration, they told the justices in their filing Wednesday, 'blatantly ignore the fact that many, if not the majority, of the class members in this case, including two of the named plaintiffs, have no criminal convictions whatsoever.'
CNN's Priscilla Alvarez contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
32 minutes ago
- CNN
Venezuelans in Florida react to Trump's new travel ban
President Donald Trump signed a proclamation to ban travel from several countries to the US, citing security risks, with one of the countries being Venezuela. Venezuelans in Florida reacted to the ban, with one worrying about their visa.
33 minutes ago
Detained Columbia graduate claims ‘irreparable harm' to career and family as he pleads for release
NEW YORK -- A Columbia graduate facing deportation over his pro-Palestinian activism on campus has outlined the 'irreparable harm' caused by his continued detention as a federal judge weighs his release. Mahmoud Khalil said in court filings unsealed Thursday that the 'most immediate and visceral harms' he's faced in his months detained in Louisiana relate to missing out on the birth of his first child in April. 'Instead of holding my wife's hand in the delivery room, I was crouched on a detention center floor, whispering through a crackling phone line as she labored alone,' the 30-year-old legal U.S. resident wrote. 'When I heard my son's first cries, I buried my face in my arms so no one would see me weep.' He also cited potentially 'career-ending' harms from the ordeal, noting that Oxfam International has already rescinded a job offer to serve as a policy advisor. Even his mother's visa to come to the U.S. to help care for his infant son is also now under federal review, Khalil said. 'As someone who fled prosecution in Syria for my political beliefs, for who I am, I never imagined myself to be in immigration detention, here in the United States,' he wrote. 'Why should protesting this Israel government's indiscriminate killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians result in the erosion of my constitutional rights?' Spokespersons for the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment. Khalil's 13-page statement was among a number of legal declarations his lawyers filed highlighting the wide-ranging negative impacts of his arrest. Dr. Noor Abdalla, his U.S. citizen wife, described the challenges of not having her husband to help navigate their son's birth and the first weeks of his young life. Students and professors at Columbia wrote about the chilling effect Khalil's arrest has had on campus life, with people afraid to attend protests or participate in groups that can be viewed as critical of the Trump administration. Last week, a federal judge in New Jersey said the Trump administration's effort to deport Khalil likely violates the Constitution. Judge Michael Farbiarz wrote the government's primary justification for removing Khalil — that his beliefs may pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy — could open the door to vague and arbitrary enforcement. Khalil was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under Trump's widening crackdown on students who joined campus protests against .
33 minutes ago
Peruvian migrant acquitted in the first trial over the new militarized zone at US-Mexico border
EL PASO, Texas -- A Peruvian woman who crossed the U.S. border illegally was acquitted Thursday of unauthorized access to a newly designated militarized zone in the first trial under the Trump administration's efforts to prosecute immigrants who cross in certain parts of New Mexico and western Texas. Adely Vanessa De La Cruz-Alvarez, 21, was arrested last month near the West Texas town of Tornillo after she entered the U.S. from Mexico by walking across the riverbed of the Rio Grande, court documents show. In addition to being charged with entering the country illegally, she was charged with accessing a military zone. She is among several other immigrants who have been charged under the law since President Donald Trump's administration transferred oversight of a strip of land along the border to the military. It is as part of a new approach the Department of Justice is taking to crack down on illegal immigration. The Associated Press left messages Thursday with De La Cruz-Alvarez's attorney, Veronica Teresa Lerma. The lawyer told The Texas Tribune the acquittal is significant. 'Hopefully, this sets the tone for the federal government,' Lerma said, 'so they know what the El Paso community will do with these charges.' Even before the woman's case went to trial, federal magistrate judges in neighboring New Mexico had dismissed similar cases, finding little evidence that immigrants knew about the zones. Lerma was convicted of entering the country illegally and was already facing deportation, but could have faced up to 18 months in prison for entering the militarized zone. Despite the verdict, U.S. Attorney Justin Simmons of the Western District of Texas said his office will continue to aggressively prosecute National Defense Area violations. 'At the end of the day, another illegal alien has been found guilty of illegally entering the country in violation of the improper entry statute and will be removed from the United States,' Simmons said in a statement. "That's a win for America." The administration wants to sharply increase the removal of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally as Trump seeks to make good on his pledge of mass deportations. The administration has deployed thousands of troops to the border, while arrests have plunged to the lowest levels since the mid-1960s.
