- A U.S. judge has accused the Trump administration of bypassing immigration laws by deporting Nigerian and Gambian migrants to Ghana.
- The migrants were reportedly sent to Ghana without notice, despite legal protections preventing their return to their home countries.
- One migrant has already been sent to Gambia and gone into hiding; four others are detained in poor conditions in Ghana.
- Ghana’s President confirmed an agreement to accept West African deportees, sparking backlash from opposition lawmakers.
- The U.S. Department of Justice claims it no longer has custody of the migrants and cannot intervene in Ghana’s actions.
- Critics say the deal risks aligning Ghana with harsh U.S. immigration policies without parliamentary approval.
A U.S. federal judge has raised serious concerns over the Trump administration’s handling of migrant deportations, accusing officials of deliberately sidestepping legal protections by sending Nigerian and Gambian migrants to Ghana. The move, part of a broader strategy to use “third countries” for expedited removals, has triggered legal challenges and diplomatic tension.
Judge Tanya Chutkan, based in Washington, D.C., convened an emergency hearing after lawyers revealed that several migrants were flown out of the U.S. under questionable circumstances. According to court filings, five individuals were taken from a Louisiana detention center, shackled, and placed on a military aircraft without being told their destination. Some were reportedly restrained in straitjackets for up to 16 hours.
One of the migrants, identified as bisexual, has already been sent to Gambia and is now in hiding. The remaining four are being held in an open-air detention facility operated by the Ghanaian military, under conditions described as squalid and unsafe.
The migrants had legal protections under U.S. immigration law, which bars deportation to countries where they face persecution or torture. Judge Chutkan ordered the Trump administration to explain how it was working to prevent Ghana from transferring the migrants to Nigeria or Gambia, warning that the arrangement appeared to be an “end run” around established legal safeguards.
Ghana’s President, John Dramani Mahama, confirmed that his country had agreed to accept West African deportees and had already received 14 individuals. However, the deal has sparked criticism at home. Opposition lawmakers argue that the agreement should have been vetted by Ghana’s National Assembly and warn that it risks portraying the country as complicit in a controversial U.S. immigration regime.
The U.S. Department of Justice maintains that it no longer has custody of the migrants and that the court lacks authority over diplomatic matters. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security denies the use of straitjackets but has not addressed the broader legal concerns.
The case has ignited debate over the ethics of third-country deportations and Ghana’s role in facilitating them. As legal proceedings unfold, the spotlight remains on the human cost of immigration enforcement and the diplomatic fallout of decisions made behind closed doors.
