Among the most consequential immigration cases of the Supreme Court’s October 2026 term is Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., which asks whether the Trump administration may deport migrants to countries other than their own without giving them a meaningful chance to argue they face persecution or torture there.
The practice, known as third country removal, has been one of the administration’s most aggressive immigration enforcement tools. Under the policy, migrants can be sent to nations with which they have no prior connection, sometimes with minimal notice. Immigrant advocates say the policy exposes people to grave danger, while the administration argues it is a lawful exercise of executive authority over removal.
In granting certiorari on September 29, 2026, the court also granted the government’s application to stay a lower court decision halting the practice, allowing third country removals to continue while the case proceeds. That interim ruling was itself a significant victory for the administration.
The questions presented go to the heart of judicial power over immigration. The court will consider whether the district court had jurisdiction over the claims at all, whether it had authority to enter class wide declaratory relief under 8 U.S.C. section 1252(f)(1), and whether the government’s guidance on third country removals violates the immigration statutes, the due process clause, or protections under the Convention Against Torture and its implementing regulations.
A companion immigration case will examine mandatory detention. In Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, the court will decide whether federal law requires the detention without bond of noncitizens arrested inside the United States, even those like Barbosa da Cunha, a Brazilian citizen who lived in the country for approximately twenty years. Most federal appeals courts to address the question have read the statute to permit bond hearings, while the Fifth and Eighth Circuits have sided with the government.
Together, the cases will determine how much process the Constitution and the immigration laws require before the government can detain and deport. For the millions of immigrants potentially affected by the mandatory detention policy alone, the answers will be life altering.
Arguments are expected in December, with decisions likely by the end of the term in mid 2027.
The jurisdictional questions in D.V.D. are technically complex but profoundly important. Section 1252 of the immigration laws sharply limits judicial review of removal decisions, and the government argues those limits strip courts of power to second guess third country designations. The challengers respond that the statute cannot be read to eliminate all review of constitutional claims, particularly where people allege they will face torture.
Sources: JD Supra, Law.com. Image: Scales of justice statue, CC BY 3.0 by Londisland via Wikimedia Commons.
