The flights, operated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, dropped off men and women in Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Liberia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. The records show none of the deportees held citizenship in the countries where they were sent. Those removed came from countries including Afghanistan, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Nepal, Turkey and Venezuela, along with African nationals sent to countries other than their own.

The practice, known as third-country deportation, allows the government to remove people to nations that are not their homeland when their country of origin is considered unsafe or refuses to accept them back. It has expanded steadily this year as the administration has struck a growing number of agreements with foreign governments, many of which have not been made public.

Records reviewed for this story suggest the arrangements vary widely by country. Some nations, including Ghana and Sierra Leone, have reportedly agreed only to accept deportees originally from elsewhere in Africa. Others, such as Eswatini, the Central African Republic and Liberia, have taken in people removed from Latin America, Europe and Asia. Some of those sent to Eswatini and South Sudan had prior criminal convictions in the United States, while many others had no criminal history beyond an immigration violation.

“essential to the safety of our homeland and the American people”

— Department of Homeland Security statement

One Case, Many Questions

Immigration attorneys say the expanded use of third-country removals is increasingly touching people who had already won limited legal protections in U.S. immigration court. One case involves a man who had received a form of protection known as withholding of removal after a judge found he could face persecution if returned to Afghanistan. That protection barred his removal to Afghanistan specifically, but did not prevent authorities from sending him to a third country instead.

His attorney argues the strategy effectively hollows out protections that are supposed to shield vulnerable people from being sent somewhere they could be harmed. The Department of Homeland Security maintains that all removals follow due process and that the government is simply enforcing the law as written for people who have no legal right to remain in the country.

A Program Still Taking Shape

Because the underlying agreements with receiving countries have largely not been disclosed, outside observers have limited insight into what commitments, if any, those governments have made regarding the treatment or resettlement of people they accept. Advocacy groups have pushed for more transparency, arguing that the public has a right to know the terms under which vulnerable people are being relocated to countries with which they have no prior connection.

Officials familiar with the program say additional flights are expected in the coming weeks as more countries finalize arrangements with Washington, suggesting the scope of the third-country strategy is likely to keep growing rather than level off.

A Rapidly Expanding Map

A year ago, third-country removals to Africa were essentially untested; the first flight to the Central African Republic took place only a few months back. Since then, the list of participating nations has grown quickly, and the pace of flights has accelerated alongside it. Analysts who track immigration enforcement say the expansion reflects both a shortage of countries willing to accept deportees directly and a deliberate strategy by the administration to widen its options as more governments push back on accepting returns.

The receiving countries themselves range widely in size, wealth and political stability, and the records reviewed for this story offer little detail about what happens to deportees once they arrive. In several cases, people have reportedly been placed in short-term detention facilities upon arrival before being released into unfamiliar countries with no established support networks, language ties, or legal status.

What Comes Next

Congressional Democrats have signaled interest in requesting more detailed briefings on the scope of the third-country agreements, though it remains unclear whether such requests will yield additional public disclosure given the administration's preference for keeping the underlying arrangements confidential. Immigration advocacy organizations, meanwhile, say they are tracking individual cases as best they can, largely relying on family members and attorneys to learn where deportees have ended up.

For now, the flights continue with little public notice, and the records reviewed for this story suggest the administration views the program as one of its most effective enforcement tools, even as questions about transparency and due process remain largely unresolved.

Next checkpoint

What to watch

The written agreements with receiving governments, court challenges, conditions after arrival and whether the United States discloses nationality and case-level due-process information.

Evidence

Sources and editorial notes

This post was reviewed against the linked primary material and independent sources. Developing figures are labeled and may change.

Spot an error? Read our corrections policy.

ICEdeportationimmigration policythird-country removal