Federal agents flew more than 100 migrants out of the United States to eight African nations in just ten days, marking a major expansion of a deportation strategy that sends people to countries they have never called home.
Quick Take
- Internal government documents show ICE sent over 100 deportees from Afghanistan, Cuba and other nations to eight African countries over a ten-day span.
- Five migrants who resisted deportation to Liberia were instead flown to Equatorial Guinea under the same arrangement.
- The Associated Press identified ten African destination countries in total, including South Sudan, Rwanda, Uganda and Ghana.
- The removals rely on a federal law letting Homeland Security send migrants to any country willing to take them when their home country will not.
- Rights groups and at least one federal court have challenged the practice, calling parts of it unlawful.
A Rapid Expansion Across Eight African Nations
Over ten days, the Trump administration removed more than 100 people to eight African countries, according to internal government documents.
The deportees came from Afghanistan, Cuba and other nations. Many had no ties to the African countries receiving them. The scale marks a sharp escalation in the removal method the government has used with increasing frequency this year.
Separately, it was confirmed that migrants have actually landed in these third countries under the arrangement. In one case, five people set to be deported to Liberia resisted leaving the plane. Instead of turning back, the aircraft rerouted and dropped them in Equatorial Guinea. The incident shows how flexible and unpredictable these removal flights have become for the people on them.
The Legal Tool Making These Removals Possible
Federal law allows the Homeland Security Secretary to send a deportee to any country willing to accept them, even if that country was not named in the original removal order.
The rule applies when sending someone to their home country or a country they have ties to is deemed impractical or blocked. This is the legal foundation behind every flight described in recent reporting.
Courts have already weighed in on how fast this can happen. A federal appeals court lifted a block on the policy earlier this year, clearing the way for accelerated third-country removals with only limited notice to the person being deported.
That ruling gave the administration room to move quickly, even as legal fights over the practice continue in other courtrooms.
Case Files That Put Faces on the Numbers
An ICE notice obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution told an Iranian woman detained in Georgia that the agency planned to remove her to the Central African Republic, a country with no connection to her case.
The document used blunt, official language, stating the agency intended to remove her there directly, regardless of her nationality or history.
Cases like this illustrate why the policy draws attention. The deportee has no family, language, or community tie to the receiving nation.
The government’s position is that removal itself, not the destination’s familiarity, satisfies the legal requirement, since the receiving country agreed to accept the person.
Formal Agreements With African Governments Underpin the Program
Amnesty International identified more than a dozen African nations that have signed agreements to accept third-country deportees from the United States, including the Central African Republic, Rwanda, Uganda, Ghana, and Equatorial Guinea.
A news outlet confirmed removals to ten of these countries so far, spanning nations with vastly different governments, economies, and security conditions.
These agreements allow the administration to deport individuals even when their home countries refuse to take them back. For an administration that campaigned on faster, tougher enforcement, third-country deals close a loophole that let some migrants avoid removal indefinitely simply because their origin nation would not cooperate. That is a defensible use of existing law, not an invention of new authority.
Legal Challenges Continue Alongside the Flights
A federal district court in Massachusetts previously ruled that an earlier version of the third-country removal policy was unlawful and vacated it, siding with immigrant rights groups who argued the process denied adequate notice.
That ruling did not end the practice. It shows the legal fight over notice and process remains active even as removals continue under updated procedures.
ICE Deports Afghans And Others To Africa, Expanding Third Country Deportations
Why Are You Demonic Supposed To Be Law Enforcement Deporting People To Foreign Countries Instead Of Sending Them To Their Home Countries? You Want To Have Them
Killed. Shame On All Of You— Venida Johnson (@JohnsonVenida) August 30, 2026
The pace of these flights suggests the administration views third-country removals as a durable, expanding tool rather than a temporary fix.
With agreements now covering more than a dozen African nations, the program is poised to grow further, and the legal battles over notice and destination selection are likely to keep pace.
Sources:
wsws.org, kjzz.org, amnesty.org, ajc.com, apnews.com, allsides.com, panafricannews.blogspot.com, bostonglobe.com
