美联邦上诉法院裁定特朗普第三国快速遣返政策违法US Appeals Court Rules Trump Third-Country Deportation Policy Unlawful

第一巡回上诉法院法官塞思·阿弗拉姆代表三名法官组成的小组撰写了裁决书。阿弗拉姆在判词中指出，移民在被驱逐出境前必须获得提出安全关切的“实质性”机会，明确拒绝了特朗普政府对相关法律所作的狭义解释。该案源于一项集体诉讼，旨在明确界定移民在被移送至毫无关联的国家之前应享有的正当程序权利。法院认定，如果移民在毫无通知的情况下被送往陌生国家，现行政策可能会剥夺其应享有的法定保护。

Writing for the three-judge panel, US Circuit Judge Seth Aframe stated that migrants must be afforded a "meaningful" opportunity to raise safety concerns before removal, rejecting the Trump administration's narrower interpretation of the governing law. The ruling stems from a class-action lawsuit testing the scope of due process protections owed to migrants before they are sent to countries with which they have no ties. The court held that the Department of Homeland Security's policy risks denying critical legal protections if migrants are transferred to unfamiliar nations without adequate notice or an opportunity to challenge removal if they fear persecution or torture there.

在此项诉讼中，原告方挑战了国土安全部的一项规定，该政策原本允许官方将已收到最终驱逐令的移民遣往第三国，只要美方获得有关其不会面临迫害或酷刑的外交保证即可。上诉法院同时在程序性问题上推翻了原审裁决的局部内容，涉及官员是否必须首先尝试将移民遣送回与其存在关联的国家。原告代理律师、来自国家移民诉讼联盟的特里娜·雷亚尔穆托指出，该判决证实了国会为防止迫害与酷刑所确立的正当程序保护，不能通过简单将人送上飞往从未出现在驱逐程序中的国家的飞机而被规避。

The legal challenge focused on DHS rules allowing migrants with final deportation orders to be sent to third countries provided authorities possess diplomatic assurances against persecution or torture. While largely upholding the earlier decision finding the policy unlawful, the appeals court overturned one aspect of the ruling on procedural grounds regarding whether federal officials must first attempt deportation to countries to which migrants have existing ties. Trina Realmuto, an attorney for the plaintiffs at the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said the decision confirms that statutory protections against persecution and torture cannot be circumvented by deporting individuals to nations excluded from their original removal proceedings.

针对第一巡回上诉法院的判决，国土安全部总法律顾问詹姆斯·珀西瓦尔在社交平台X上作出回应，坚称由于周五的裁决尚未正式生效，该项第三国遣返政策在现阶段依然处于有效执行状态。珀西瓦尔在发文中表达了政府的执法立场，表示如果移民在其母国声称面临恐惧，国土安全部有权将其遣送至其他国家。

Following the First Circuit panel's decision, Department of Homeland Security General Counsel James Percival posted on the social media platform X, stating that the third-country removal policy remains in force because Friday's ruling has not yet taken legal effect. Defending the federal government's enforcement authority under the policy framework, Percival stated that if migrants assert fear in their home countries, DHS retains the right to deport them to alternative destinations.

尽管国土安全部官方未立即对媒体发表进一步置评，但外界普遍预计特朗普政府将向美国联邦最高法院提起上诉。随着该争议性遣返方案在下级法院面临法律限制，司法层面的最终裁决可能再次由最高法院定夺。此前，这一遣返项目已两度进入最高法院的审理程序，成为联邦政府与人权机构就移民法定程序博弈的焦点。

While DHS did not provide immediate formal comment beyond that response, the Trump administration is widely expected to appeal the appeals court's ruling to the US Supreme Court. The legal struggle follows previous proceedings where the controversial deportation initiative reached the Supreme Court twice, setting up another potential showdown before the high court over the extent of statutory protections and due process afforded to deportees.

这项于2025年3月通过的遣返政策允许美国官员在仅提供最低限度通知的情况下，凭借获得的外交保证将移民移送至第三国。自该机制实施以来，美国已与多国达成协议，将超过2.5万名移民送往至少29个国家。然而，多个接收国本身因压制性政府和不良人权记录而受到人权团体的广泛批评。在2025年的一起案例中，联邦最高法院曾允许美方将包括古巴、缅甸和越南籍人士在内的8名男子遣送至南苏丹，尽管美国国务院因犯罪、绑架和武装冲突将该国列为不建议前往的地区。当时国土安全部将此项驱逐称为一项胜利，而人权组织则谴责其无视了基本的正当保护。

Adopted in March 2025, the third-country removal policy authorized US officials to deport migrants with minimal notice provided diplomatic assurances against persecution were in place. Under the framework, the administration struck bilateral agreements to send more than 25,000 migrants to at least 29 nations. However, human rights organizations have sharply criticized the arrangements, noting that several receiving countries have notoriously repressive governments and poor human rights records. In 2025, the Supreme Court permitted the deportation of eight men—including nationals of Cuba, Myanmar, and Vietnam—to South Sudan, a nation the US State Department advises against visiting due to crime, kidnapping, and armed conflict. While DHS described those deportations as a win, advocacy groups argued the practice flouted fundamental protections.

人权组织与媒体的实地追踪进一步记录了被驱逐人员在部分接收国面临的严重风险。美联社报道显示，两名被美国遣送至赤道几内亚的男子遭遇了任意拘押，当地警察用袋子套住其头部实施殴打，并将二人持枪扣押在一家被改建为拘留中心的酒店内。人权观察人士指出，此类事件表明仅依赖外交保证无法有效防止被遣返者在陌生第三国遭受虐待。

On-the-ground accounts highlighted specific safety hazards faced by deportees sent to unfamiliar destinations. According to reporting by the Associated Press, two men deported by the United States to Equatorial Guinea were subjected to arbitrary detention, where police placed bags over their heads, beat them, and held them at gunpoint inside a hotel converted into a detention facility. Rights advocates point to such incidents as evidence that diplomatic assurances fail to prevent severe abuse upon arrival.

第一巡回上诉法院针对第三国遣返的裁决，构成了特朗普政府移民政策在本月遭遇的多起司法受挫之一。此前，一名联邦法官叫停了特朗普政府计划对学生签证和记者签证实施的配额上限，并直言联邦政府支持该限额规定的法律理由“极其薄弱”。

The First Circuit panel's decision restricting third-country deportations adds to a string of legal setbacks encountered by the Trump administration's immigration agenda this month. In a separate proceeding, a federal judge blocked proposed caps on student and journalist visas, characterizing the administration's stated justification for the policy as "exceptionally weak."

与此同时，特朗普政府推行的另一项移民限制规则也面临广泛的州际联合诉讼。由全美22个州以及华盛顿特区组成的联盟已提起诉讼，要求阻止一项允许美方官员向合法使用公共福利的移民拒发绿卡的新规。多起针对签证配额、绿卡申请以及第三国遣返机制的司法诉讼，使政府的一系列移民管制措施在各级联邦法院受到持续阻截。

At the same time, another core element of the administration's immigration restrictions faces active multi-jurisdictional litigation. A coalition comprising 22 states and Washington, DC, filed a lawsuit to halt a rule authorizing immigration officials to deny green cards to immigrants who lawfully access public benefits. These parallel legal challenges, spanning visa quotas, permanent residency standards, and expedited deportation frameworks, have placed key executive immigration measures under sustained scrutiny across multiple federal courts.