The US said it had no choice but to deport them to a third country. Then it sent them home
President Donald Trump aims to deport millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally and his administration has sought to ramp up removals to third countries, including sending convicted criminals to South Sudan and Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland, two sub-Saharan African nations.
Immigrants convicted of crimes typically first serve their U.S. sentences before being deported. This appeared to be the case with the eight men deported toSouth Sudan and five to Eswatini, although some had been released years earlier.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said in June that third-country deportations allow them to deport people 'so uniquely barbaric that their own countries won't take them back.' Critics have countered that it's not clear the U.S. tried to return the men deported to South Sudan and Eswatini to their home countries and that the deportations were unnecessarily cruel.
Reuters found that at least five men threatened with deportation to Libya in May were sent to their home countries weeks later, according to interviews with two of the men, a family member and attorneys.
After a U.S. judge blocked the Trump administration from sending them to Libya, two men from Vietnam, two men from Laos and a man from Mexico were all deported to their home nations. The deportations have not previously been reported.
DHS did not comment on the removals. Reuters could not determine if their home countries initially refused to take them or why the U.S. tried to send them to Libya.
DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin contested that the home countries of criminals deported to third countries were willing to take them back, but did not provide details on any attempts to return the five men home before they were threatened with deportation to Libya.
'If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, you could end up in CECOT, Alligator Alcatraz, Guantanamo Bay, or South Sudan or another third country,' McLaughlin said in a statement, referencing El Salvador's maximum-security prison and a detention center in the subtropical Florida Everglades.
FAR FROM HOME
DHS did not respond to a request for the number of third-country deportations since Trump took office on January 20, although there have been thousands to Mexico and hundreds to other countries.
The eight men sent to South Sudan were from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, South Sudan and Vietnam, according to DHS. The man DHS said was from South Sudan had a deportation order to Sudan, according to a court filing. The five men sent to Eswatini were from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen, according to DHS.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the men deported to South Sudan and Eswatini were 'the worst of the worst' and included people convicted in the United States of child sex abuse and murder. 'American communities are safer with these heinous illegal criminals gone,' Jackson said in a statement.
The Laos government did not respond to requests for comment regarding the men threatened with deportation to Libya and those deported to South Sudan and Eswatini. Vietnam's foreign ministry spokesperson said on July 17 that the government was verifying information regarding the South Sudan deportation but did not provide additional comment to Reuters.
The government of Mexico did not comment.
The Trump administration acknowledged in a May 22 court filing that the man from Myanmar had valid travel documents to return to his home country but he was deported to South Sudan anyway.DHS said the man had been convicted of sexual assault involving a victim mentally and physically incapable of resisting.
Eswatini's government said on Tuesday that it was still holding the five migrants sent there in isolated prison units under the deal with the Trump administration.
'A VERY RANDOM OUTCOME'
The Supreme Court in June allowed the Trump administration to deport migrants to third countrieswithout giving them a chance to show they could be harmed. But the legality of the removals is still being contested in a federal lawsuit in Boston, a case that could potentially wind its way back to the conservative-leaning high court.
Critics say the removals aim to stoke fear among migrants and encourage them to 'self deport' to their home countries rather than be sent to distant countries they have no connection with.
'This is a message that you may end up with a very random outcome that you're going to like a lot less than if you elect to leave under your own steam,' said Michelle Mittelstadt, communications director for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute.
Internal U.S. immigration enforcement guidance issued in July said migrants could be deported to countries that had not provided diplomatic assurances of their safety in as little as six hours.
While the administration has highlighted the deportations of convicted criminals to African countries, it has also sent asylum-seeking Afghans, Russians and others to Panama and Costa Rica.
The Trump administration deported more than 200 Venezuelans accused of being gang members to El Salvador in March, where they were held in the country's CECOT prison without access to attorneys until they were released in a prisoner swap last month.
More than 5,700 non-Mexican migrants have been deported to Mexico since Trump took office, according to Mexican government data, continuing a policy that beganunder former President Joe Biden.
The fact that one Mexican man was deported to South Sudan and another threatened with deportation to Libya suggests that the Trump administration did not try to send them to their home countries, according to Trina Realmuto, executive director at the pro-immigrant National Immigration Litigation Alliance.
'Mexico historically accepts back its own citizens,' said Realmuto, one of the attorneys representing migrants in the lawsuit contesting third-country deportations.
The eight men deported to South Sudan included Mexican national Jesus Munoz Gutierrez, who had served a sentence in the U.S. for second-degree murder and was directly taken into federal immigration custody afterward, according to Realmuto. Court records show Munoz stabbed and killed a roommateduring a fight in 2004.
When the Trump administration first initiated the deportation in late May, Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government had not been informed.
'If he does want to be repatriated, then the United States would have to bring him to Mexico,' Sheinbaum said at the time.
His sister, Guadalupe Gutierrez, said in an interview that she didn't understand why he was sent to South Sudan, where he is currently in custody. Shesaid Mexico is trying to get her brother home.
'Mexico never rejected my brother,' Gutierrez said.
'USING US AS A PAWN'
Immigration hardliners see the third-country removals as a way to deal with immigration offenders who can't easily be deported and could pose a threat to the U.S. public.
"The Trump administration is prioritizing the safety of American communities over the comfort of these deportees,' said Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports lower levels of immigration.
The Trump administrationin Julypressed other African nations to take migrants and has askedthe Pacific Islands nation of Palau, among others.
Under U.S. law, federal immigration officials can deport someone to a country other than their place of citizenship when all other efforts are 'impracticable, inadvisable or impossible.'
Immigration officials must first try to send an immigrant back to their home country, and if they fail, then to a country with which they have a connection, such as where they lived or were born.
For a Lao man who was almost deported to Libya in early May, hearing about the renewed third-country deportations took him back to his own close call. In an interview from Laos granted on condition of anonymity because of fears for his safety, he asked why the U.S. was 'using us as a pawn?'
His attorney said the man had served a prison sentence for a felony. Reuters could not establish what he was convicted of.
He recalled officials telling him to sign his deportation order to Libya, which he refused, telling them he wanted to be sent to Laos instead. They told him he would be deported to Libya regardless of whether he signed or not, he said. DHS did not comment on the allegations.
The man, who came to the United States in the early 1980s as a refugee when he was four years old, said he was now trying to learn the Lao language and adapt to his new life, 'taking it day by day.'
(Reporting by Kristina Cooke in San Francisco and Ted Hesson in Washington; Additional reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Brendan O'Boyle and Lizbeth Diaz in Mexico City, Marc Frank in Havana, Phuong Nguyen and Khanh Vu in Hanoi, Panu Wongcha-um in Bangkok, Kirsty Neeham in Sydney; Editing by Mary Milliken and Claudia Parsons)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
24 minutes ago
- The Star
World economies reel from Trump's tariffs punch
ASIA/SOUTH-EAST ASIA (AFP): Global markets reeled at the weekend after President Donald Trump's tariffs barrage against nearly all US trading partners as governments looked down the barrel of a seven-day deadline before higher duties take effect. Trump announced late Thursday that dozens of economies, including the European Union, will face new tariff rates of between 10 and 41 per cent. However, implementation will be on August 7 rather than Friday as previously announced, the White House said. This gives governments a window to rush to strike deals with Washington setting more favorable conditions. Neighboring Canada, one of the biggest US trade partners, was hit with 35 percent levies, up from 25 percent, effective Friday -- but with wide-ranging, current exemptions remaining in place. The tariffs are a demonstration of raw economic power that Trump sees putting US exporters in a stronger position, while encouraging domestic manufacturing by keeping out foreign imports. But the muscular approach has raised fears of inflation and other economic fallout in the world's biggest economy. Stock markets in Hong Kong, London and New York slumped as they digested the turmoil, while weak US employment data added to worries. Trump's actions come as debate rages over how best to steer the US economy, with the Federal Reserve this week deciding to keep interest rates unchanged, despite massive political pressure from the White House to cut. Data Friday showed US job growth missing expectations for July, while unemployment ticked up to 4.2 percent from 4.1 percent. On Wall Street, the S&P 500 dropped 1.6 percent, while the Nasdaq tumbled 2.2 percent. - Political goals - Trump raised duties on around 70 economies, from a current 10 percent level imposed in April when he unleashed "reciprocal" tariffs citing unfair trade practices. The new, steeper levels listed in an executive order vary by trading partner. Any goods "transshipped" through other jurisdictions to avoid US duties would be hit with an additional 40 percent tariff, the order said. But Trump's duties also have a distinctly political flavor, with the president using separate tariffs to pressure Brazil to drop the trial of his far-right ally, former president Jair Bolsonaro. He also warned of trade consequences for Canada, which faces a different set of duties, after Prime Minister Mark Carney announced plans to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. In targeting Canada, the White House cited its failure to "cooperate in curbing the ongoing flood of fentanyl and other illicit drugs" -- although Canada is not a major source of illegal narcotics. By contrast, Trump gave more time to Mexico, delaying for 90 days a threat to increase its tariffs from 25 percent to 30 percent. But exemptions remain for a wide range of Canadian and Mexican goods entering the United States under an existing North American trade pact. Carney said his government was "disappointed" with the latest rates hike but noted that with exclusions the US average tariff on Canadian goods remains one of the lowest among US trading partners. - 'Tears up' rule book - With questions hanging over the effectiveness of bilateral trade deals struck -- including with the EU and Japan -- the outcome of Trump's overall plan remains uncertain. "No doubt about it -- the executive order and related agreements concluded over the past few months tears up the trade rule book that has governed international trade since World War II," said Wendy Cutler, senior vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute. On Friday, Trump said he would consider distributing a tariff "dividend" to Americans. Notably excluded from Friday's drama was China, which is in the midst of negotiations with the United States. Washington and Beijing at one point brought tit-for-tat tariffs to triple-digit levels, but have agreed to temporarily lower these duties and are working to extend their truce. Those who managed to strike deals with Washington to avert steeper threatened levies included Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea and the European Union. Among other tariff levels adjusted in Trump's latest order, Switzerland now faces a higher 39 per cent duty. - AFP
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Europe is breaking its reliance on US climate data amid Trump-era science cuts
EU governments prepare to go it alone on some data after Trump cuts Data on sea-level rise and extreme weather events put at risk by cuts to NOAA Efforts builds on 'guerrilla archiving' — a dash by independent scientists to preserve US data BRUSSELS, August 3 — European governments are taking steps to break their dependence on critical scientific data the United States historically made freely available to the world, and are ramping up their own data collection systems to monitor climate change and weather extremes, according to Reuters interviews. The effort — which has not been previously reported — marks the most concrete response from the European Union and other European governments so far to the US government's retreat from scientific research under President Donald Trump's administration. Since his return to the White House, Trump has initiated sweeping budget cuts to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, the National Institutes of Health, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Centres for Disease Control and other agencies, dismantling programmes conducting climate, weather, geospatial and health research, and taking some public databases offline. As those cuts take effect, European officials have expressed increasing alarm that — without continued access to US-supported weather and climate data — governments and businesses will face challenges in planning for extreme weather events and long-term infrastructure investment, according to Reuters interviews. In March, more than a dozen European countries urged the EU Commission to move fast to recruit American scientists who lose their jobs to those cuts. Asked for comment on NOAA cuts and the EU's moves to expand its own collection of scientific data, the White House Office of Management and Budget said Trump's proposed cuts to the agency's 2026 budget were aimed at programmes that spread 'fake Green New Scam 'science,'' a reference to climate change research and policy. 'Under President Trump's leadership, the US is funding real science again,' Rachel Cauley, an OMB spokesperson, said via email. European officials told Reuters that — beyond the risk of losing access to data that is bedrock to the world's understanding of climate change and marine systems — they were concerned by the general US pullback from research. 'The current situation is much worse than we could have expected,' Sweden's State Secretary for Education and Research Maria Nilsson, told Reuters. 'My reaction is, quite frankly, shock.' The Danish Meteorological Institute described the US government data as 'absolutely vital' — and said it relied on several data sets to measure including sea ice in the Arctic and sea surface temperatures. 'This isn't just a technical issue, reliable data underpins extreme weather warnings, climate projections, protecting communities and ultimately saves lives,' said Adrian Lema, director of the DMI's National Centre for Climate Research. Reuters interviewed officials from eight European countries who said their governments were undertaking reviews of their reliance on US marine, climate and weather data. Officials from seven countries — Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden — described joint efforts now in the early stages to safeguard key health and climate data and research programmes. Leaning on the US As a priority, the EU is expanding its access to ocean observation data, a senior European Commission official told Reuters. Those data sets are seen as critical to the shipping and energy industries as well as early storm warning systems. Over the next two years, the senior official said, the EU plans to expand its own European Marine Observation and Data Network which collects and hosts data on shipping routes, seabed habitats, marine litter and other concerns. The initiative was aimed at 'mirroring and possibly replacing US-based services,' the senior European Commission official told Reuters. Europe is particularly concerned about its vulnerability to US funding cuts to NOAA's research arm that would affect the Global Ocean Observing System, a network of ocean observation programmes that supports navigation services, shipping routes and storm forecasting, a second EU official told Reuters. The insurance industry relies on the Global Ocean Observing System's disaster records for risk modelling. Coastal planners use shoreline, sea-level, and hazard data to guide infrastructure investments. The energy industry uses oceanic and seismic datasets to assess offshore drilling or wind farm viability. In addition, the senior EU Commission official said, the EU is considering increasing its funding of the Argo programme, a part of the Global Ocean Observing System which operates a global system of floats to monitor the world's oceans and track global warming, extreme weather events and sea-level rise. NOAA last year described the programme, in operation for over 25 years, as the 'crown jewel' of ocean science. It makes its data freely available to the oil and gas industry, marine tourism and other industries. The United States funds 57 per cent of Argo's US$40 million annual operating expenses, while the EU funds 23 per cent. The White House and NOAA did not respond to questions about future support for that programme. The European moves to establish independent data collection and play a bigger role in Argo represent a historic break with decades of US leadership in ocean science, said Craig McLean, who retired in 2022 after four decades at the agency. He said US leadership of weather, climate and marine data collection was unmatched, and that through NOAA the US has paid for more than half of the world's ocean measurements. European scientists acknowledge the outsized role the US government has played in global scientific research and data collection — and that European countries have grown overly dependent on that work. 'It's a bit like defence: we rely heavily on the US in that area, too. They're trailblazers and role models-but that also makes us dependent on them,' Katrin Boehning-Gaese, scientific director of Germany's Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, told Reuters. 'Guerrilla archivists' A number of European governments are now taking measures to reduce that dependence. Nordic countries met to coordinate data storage efforts in the Spring, Norwegian Minister of Research and Higher Education Sigrun Aasland told Reuters. European science ministers also discussed the US science budget cuts at a meeting in Paris in May. Aasland said Norway was setting aside US$2 million to back up and store US data to ensure stable access. The Danish Meteorological Institute in February started downloading historical US climate data in case it is deleted by the US It is also preparing to switch from American observations to alternatives, Christina Egelund, Minister of Higher Education and Science of Denmark, said in an interview. 'The potentially critical issue is when new observations data stop coming in,' the Institute's Lema said. While weather models could continue to operate without US data, he said the quality would suffer. Meanwhile, the German government has commissioned scientific organisations, including the center, to review its reliance on US databases. Since Trump returned to the White House, scientists and citizens worldwide have been downloading US databases related to climate, public health or the environment that are slated for decommissioning — calling it 'guerrilla archiving.' 'We actually received requests-or let's say emergency calls-from our colleagues in the US, who said, 'We have a problem here... and we will have to abandon some datasets', said Frank Oliver Gloeckner, head of the digital archive PANGAEA, which is operated by publicly funded German research institutions. About 800 of NOAA's 12,000-strong workforce have been terminated or taken financial incentives to resign as part of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency cuts. The White House 2026 budget plan seeks to shrink NOAA even further, proposing a US$1.8 billion cut, or 27 per cent of the agency's budget, and a near-20 per cent reduction in staffing, bringing down the NOAA workforce to 10,000. The budget proposal would eliminate the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, NOAA's main research arm, which is responsible for ocean observatory systems including Argo, coastal observing networks, satellite sensors and climate model labs. It is also reducing its data products. Between April and June, NOAA announced on its website the decommissioning of 20 datasets or products related to earthquakes and marine science. NOAA did not respond to requests for comment. Gloeckner said there were no legal hurdles to storing the US government data as it was already in the public domain. But without significant funds and infrastructure, there are limits to what private scientists can save, said Denice Ross, a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists, a nonprofit science policy group and the US government's chief data officer during Joe Biden's administration. Databases need regular updating — which requires the funding and infrastructure that only governments can provide, Ross said. Over the last few months, the Federation and EU officials have held a series of talks with European researchers, US philanthropies and health and environment advocacy groups to discuss how to prioritise what data to save. 'There is an opportunity for other nations and institutions and philanthropies to fill in the gaps if US quality starts to falter,' she said. — Reuters
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Biofuel battle: Why India is shielding its farmers in the face of US trade pressure
MUMBAI, Aug 3 — US President Donald Trump on Thursday slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods after prolonged talks that got bogged down over access to India's labour-intensive agricultural sector, which New Delhi has pledged to protect. Why is India opposing the products the US is lobbying for? The United States is pressing India to open its markets to a wide range of American products, including dairy, poultry, corn, soybeans, rice, wheat, ethanol, fruits and nuts. While India is willing to provide greater access for US dry fruits and apples, it is holding back on corn, soybeans, wheat, and dairy products. A key reason for this resistance is that most US corn and soybeans are genetically modified (GM), and India does not permit the import of GM food crops. GM crops are widely perceived in India as harmful to human health and the environment, and several groups affiliated with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are opposing their introduction. The commercial cultivation of a high-yielding GM mustard variety that India developed itself is currently not allowed due to an ongoing legal battle. Like GM crops, dairy is also a highly sensitive issue, as it provides a livelihood for millions of farmers, including many who are landless or smallholders. The dairy industry helps sustain farmers even during erratic monsoon seasons, which can cause significant fluctuations in crop production. In India, where a large proportion of the population is vegetarian, food choices are strongly influenced by cultural and dietary preferences. Indian consumers are particularly concerned that cattle in the US are often fed animal by-products — a practice that conflicts with Indian food habits. A farmer sprinkles fertiliser in a paddy field on the outskirts of Amritsar on July 5, 2025. — AFP pic Why are agricultural imports politically charged? India is self-sufficient in most farm goods, with the exception of vegetable oils. After liberalising cooking oil imports over three decades ago, the country now has to import nearly two-thirds of its supply to meet demand. India does not want to repeat this mistake with other basic foods, which account for nearly half of its consumer price index. Though agriculture makes up just 16 per cent of India's nearly US$3.9 trillion economy, it is the lifeblood for nearly half the country's 1.4 billion people. Four years ago, this powerful voting bloc forced Modi's government into a rare retreat on a set of controversial farm laws. Some in power fear a flood of cheaper US imports would bring down local prices and hand opposition parties an opportunity to sharpen its attack on the government. New Delhi is also worried that a trade deal with the US could also force it to open its agricultural sector to other countries. Farmers work in an onion farm near power-generating windmill turbines of Adani Green Energy at Ahmedabad-Narayan Sarovar state highway near Nakhatrana village in the western state of Gujarat November 29, 2024. — Reuters pic How does farming in India and the US differ? The vast disparity in the scale of farming makes it difficult for Indian farmers to compete with their US counterparts. The average Indian farm is 1.08 hectares, compared to 187 hectares in the US For dairy farmers, the difference is even more dramatic — a small herd of two or three animals versus hundreds or more in the US Many Indian farmers also rely on traditional, unmechanised techniques, while American agriculture has developed into a highly efficient, tech-driven industry. Why is India hesitant to use US ethanol in its biofuel programme? One of India's key goals with its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) programme is to reduce energy imports and support domestic farmers by using sugarcane and corn for biofuel production. Indian companies have invested heavily in new distilleries, and farmers have expanded corn cultivation to meet the rising demand. India recently achieved its ambitious target of a 20 per cent ethanol blend in petrol. With state assembly elections approaching in Bihar — a major corn-producing state in the east — allowing US ethanol imports would lower local corn prices. This would probably anger farmers and turn them against the BJP ahead of the election and also undermine the growing distillery sector. — Reuters
