Ongoing10 earlier updates35 days

This story has run 11 times over 35 days, starting Aug 26.

Aug 26USPS violated a court order to finalize Trump’s mail-ballot rule; judge allows publication
Aug 27Judge clears Trump’s USPS mail-ballot rule; 24 states and D.C. sue hours later
Aug 29UpdateJudge blocks USPS from rejecting noncompliant mail ballots for 14 days; DOJ appeals
Sep 6UpdateMissouri asks the Supreme Court to reinstate its 7-1 congressional map three days before the ballot deadline
Sep 9Kavanaugh leaves Missouri's 6-2 map in place; hours later a federal judge orders the state to run the 7-1 map
Sep 10UpdateStates ask Supreme Court to keep new USPS ballot requirements blocked
Sep 11Update3-0 First Circuit keeps Trump mail-ballot rule blocked as 7 Republican officials oppose pre-November start
Sep 15UpdateSupreme Court leaves Trump's USPS mail-ballot rules blocked for Nov. 3 midterms in apparent 7-2 vote
Sep 16UpdateMail ballots will move under pre-2026 rules on Nov. 3 as the administration stands down
Sep 27UpdateSupreme Court lets states resume checking voter rolls against Trump's expanded federal citizenship database while the case is appealed
Sep 30Supreme Court votes 6-3 to let Trump deport migrants to third countries without notice or a chance to raise torture fears — this issue

Supreme Court votes 6-3 to let Trump deport migrants to third countries without notice or a chance to raise torture fears

Immigration enforcement

Political Guyentist · September 30, 20263 min read

The justices took the case themselves: arguments in December, a ruling expected by the end of June 2027, and the policy runs until then.

On Tuesday, Sept. 29, the Supreme Court let the Trump administration resume sending deportees to countries that are not their own, without first telling them where they are going or letting them object.

The paused order. U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts ruled in February 2026 that deportees must get notice of the destination and a chance to say they would be tortured or persecuted there. The Boston-based 1st Circuit largely upheld him, and the order took effect Sept. 23.

The split. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson dissented. The majority gave no reasons.

The government's case. It says the order forced it to cancel a flight of about 70 people with criminal convictions bound for three countries. "Finding third countries willing and able to accept aliens is a delicate diplomatic endeavor," its filing said. After the ruling, DHS General Counsel James Percival urged migrants to leave on their own, pointing to the government's offer of a cash payment and a free flight home.

What next. Arguments land in the court's December sitting, with a ruling expected by the end of June 2027; the policy stays in effect until then.

What the justices will decide in DecemberWhether the Massachusetts judge had jurisdiction to hear the case at all2 details

Whether the Massachusetts judge had jurisdiction to hear the case at all
Whether the policy breaks federal law, the Due Process Clause or immigration regulations

What we’re less sure of5 of 7 claims

Medium
U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts ruled in February 2026 that deportees must get notice of the destination and a chance to raise torture or persecution fears; the 1st Circuit largely upheld the ruling and the order took effect Sept. 23.
Axios supports the February 2026 order and its notice requirement. The First Circuit opinion (Sept. 18, 2026), Politico and Reason support the appeals ruling. No listed source directly confirms the Sept. 23 effective date, and one X post gives a Feb. 25 date as unverified.
Medium
The government says the order forced it to cancel a flight of about 70 people with criminal convictions bound for three countries.
The story attributes this to the government's filing. It is a party's own assertion, and the story does not independently verify it.
Medium
The case will be argued in the court's December sitting, with a ruling expected by the end of June 2027, and the policy stays in effect until then.
Multiple outlets (Guardian, Fox, CBS and others) support the December arguments and that the stay remains during review. The end-of-June 2027 ruling date is the desk's inference from the Court's usual term calendar rather than a sourced statement.
Medium
AP counts some 25,000 people sent to more than two dozen countries under third-country deals.
The story attributes this figure to AP. Other trackers in SOURCES give lower counts: Refugees International and Human Rights First report more than 23,000 to 26 countries, USCRI reports more than 22,000, and CRS cites more than 21,000. The rounded figure of 25,000 may overstate them.
Medium
A Senate Foreign Relations minority report found $32 million paid to five countries, including $7.5 million to Rwanda, which had taken 7 people against a 250-person ceiling by January 2026.
The story attributes this to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee minority report (Feb. 13, 2026), which is listed in SOURCES. Business Insider Africa frames the $32 million as going to Rwanda and two other African countries, so the country count is partly inconsistent across sources.

Red take

The justices were right to let these removals resume until they decide, after December arguments, whether a Massachusetts trial judge could hear the case at all. Requiring notice and a chance to object for every destination turns each flight into a lawsuit, and the government says the order already cost it one: about 70 convicted criminals bound for three countries, the kind of placement its filing calls "a delicate diplomatic endeavor."

Blue take

Six justices, offering no reasons, wrongly revived a policy that lets the government send deportees to countries not their own on the receiving country's blanket promise not to torture them. A person who is not told where the plane is going cannot say he fears torture there, and a criminal record is not a sentence to torture. The justices' ruling, expected by the end of June 2027, will come after the planes have left.