UN Experts Demand End to US Migrant Deportations to Third Countries

Independent human rights experts affiliated with the United Nations have issued an urgent demand for the United States to immediately halt its controversial practice of deporting migrants to third countries, warning that the policy triggers a deadly cascade of human rights abuses and violates core international legal obligations.

The joint statement, issued in Geneva by 24 independent experts mandated by the UN Human Rights Council and supported by an African Commission special rapporteur, targets a sprawling network of international relocation agreements established since President Donald Trump returned to power in 2025, as reported by The Guardian. According to the UN panel, the US government has struck deals with 35 countries—nearly a third of them located in Africa—offering millions of dollars in foreign payments to accept migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers who possess no personal or familial ties to those host territories.

Media additions

US Has Sent Over 25,000 Migrants to Third Countries as UN Experts Warn of Torture Risk After Deportation

Data tracking the scale of these removals varies slightly across monitoring groups and official releases. Figures cited by International Business Times UK via a six-month investigation coordinated by Forbidden Stories indicate that at least 25,447 third-country nationals were expelled between January 2025 and August 31, 2026. Meanwhile, the UN experts cited a baseline of at least 23,000 individuals sent to 29 countries and territories, with roughly 20,000 transported across the southern border by bus to Mexico, according to data from Refugees International and Human Rights First. Third Country Deportation Watch similarly recorded transfers to at least 29 nations, including attempts by Washington to utilize Libya as a destination.

The human cost of these removals extends far beyond administrative logistics. Human rights lawyers and litigators emphasize that the Department of Homeland Security utilizes third-country transfers to bypass domestic and international legal prohibitions against returning asylum seekers to nations where they face direct persecution. By routing vulnerable individuals through intermediary territories, deportees are frequently pushed onward to the very home countries they initially fled. The UN panel noted that receiving states often grapple with internal conflict, poverty, and displacement, leaving them entirely unequipped to protect transferred migrants. Beatrice Njeri, regional litigator for Africa at the Global Strategic Litigation Council, highlighted harrowing accounts of abuse, citing two men expelled to Equatorial Guinea who were bound, hooded, beaten, and forced down stairs. Similar documentation uncovered by journalistic consortia highlighted the ordeals of an Iranian anti-government activist and a gay man from Ghana who had fled familial persecution.

Federal authorities maintain that the third-country deportations serve as an essential and lawful tool of immigration enforcement focused strictly on removing non-citizen criminals. The Trump administration is actively fighting lower court limitations, having asked the US Supreme Court this month to permit the continuation of the policy, as noted by Devdiscourse. This legal defense follows a federal appeals court ruling on September 18 requiring that migrants receive meaningful notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal before being shipped to a third country, as highlighted by International Business Times UK.

Parallel to the third-country expulsions, the administration has implemented a significant shift in domestic child welfare policy concerning unaccompanied minors. According to an exclusive report by Aol, a September 10 internal memo ordered federal care providers and employees to cease reporting potential labor and sex trafficking concerns directly to the dedicated Office of Trafficking in Persons. Instead, caregivers must submit such disclosures exclusively to the Office of Refugee Resettlement for initial internal investigation.

Critics argue that the structural change will isolate vulnerable minors and accelerate deportations. Jean Bruggeman, co-executive director of Freedom Network USA, warned that the directive harms children by increasing the likelihood of swift deportation before victims can secure vital protective services and legal visas. Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon similarly condemned the change, stating that forcing advocates to report trafficking to the very agency holding the child in custody sidelines specialized experts for political goals. The Office of Refugee Resettlement defended the directive, citing a prior review showing that 95% of more than 9,000 previous reports did not constitute viable criminal trafficking leads, and arguing the reform will eliminate fraudulent referrals and strengthen institutional integrity.

The intersecting pressures of mass externalization and restricted domestic protections have alarmed global observers. As legal battles persist across American courts, human rights advocates caution that European nations are actively monitoring the US operational model to contemplate similar offshore processing frameworks. The UN experts concluded their global assessment with a stern warning to all participating governments, stressing that states cannot contract out of their legal duties through bilateral financial cooperation, nor can they shield themselves from international responsibility by outsourcing enforcement.