In a landmark ruling late Friday night, a federal judge mandated that the Trump administration facilitate the return of a Guatemalan man who was wrongfully deported to Mexico, despite his legitimate fear of harm there. The ruling is part of a growing pattern of judicial pushback against controversial deportation tactics from the previous administration.
A US federal judge has ordered that the Trump administration take immediate steps to return a gay Guatemalan man to his home country after he was deported to Mexico against his will, despite fears of being harmed. The ruling, which came late Friday, followed a series of legal proceedings that highlighted a breakdown in due process.
The man, identified by his initials as OCG in legal documents, had fled Guatemala after being targeted in violent, homophobic attacks. He sought asylum in the United States, but in an unexpected twist, the Trump administration sent him on a bus to Mexico—a country he feared could subject him to further violence. Despite this risk, the US authorities continued with the deportation, bypassing an order from a US immigration judge that had protected him from being sent back to Guatemala.
Judge Brian Murphy, the district judge who issued the ruling, criticized the administration’s actions as a “blatant violation” of the man’s rights, noting that the deportation lacked any “semblance of due process.” In his ruling, Murphy described OCG’s removal as a “banal horror,” with no compelling security threat or special circumstances surrounding the case.
In his court declaration, OCG described the harrowing aftermath of being deported to Guatemala two months ago, where he has since been forced to live in hiding. “I have been living in constant panic and fear,” he told the court. “I cannot go outside, I cannot live my life like a normal person. I fear for my safety every day.”
The ruling follows similar legal challenges against the Trump administration’s rapid deportation practices, which have come under increasing scrutiny. Last week, Judge Murphy found that the Trump administration had violated a separate court order regarding the deportation of immigrants to third countries without providing adequate notice for them to object. In that case, seven individuals were deported to South Sudan, a situation that raised serious concerns about the administration’s handling of such cases.
In OCG’s case, the man had previously submitted evidence that he was a victim of serious abuse while in Mexico. He was allegedly raped and held for ransom, further compounding his fear of being sent back to a country where he had already suffered violence.
Judge Murphy’s decision is part of a wider judicial backlash against the aggressive deportation policies pursued by the Trump administration. These policies have often been criticized for their speed and lack of transparency, leaving many immigrants with little time to contest their deportation orders or appeal decisions that could have a significant impact on their lives.
The Trump administration’s handling of deportations has faced multiple legal setbacks, with federal courts ruling against policies that circumvent due process protections. Last year, the administration came under fire for deporting immigrants without properly assessing their claims for asylum, and these legal challenges are now being revisited under the Biden administration.
As the case progresses, the court’s focus will likely turn to the broader implications of deportation policies, especially concerning vulnerable populations such as LGBTQ individuals who face the threat of violence in their home countries.
OCG’s case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of safeguarding due process and ensuring that deportations are carried out in a manner that respects the rights and safety of those involved.
Judge Murphy’s ruling is a clear message that the US judicial system will not stand idly by when due process is ignored. It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will comply with the order, but the legal precedent it sets is likely to shape future decisions on deportation practices.
