Rubio Slams Court Order on South Sudan Deportations as Threat to U.S. Foreign Policy

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has sounded the alarm over a federal court order halting a deportation flight to South Sudan, warning it could wreak havoc on U.S. foreign policy. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, mandates that deportees remain in U.S. custody, citing a prior injunction allowing them time to contest removal to third countries. Rubio argues this decision not only undermines President Trump’s constitutional authority but also strains delicate diplomatic ties with nations like Libya, South Sudan, and Djibouti.

The court’s intervention has already disrupted quiet negotiations with Juba, South Sudan’s capital, where the government had begun cooperating on repatriation. “This order risks derailing efforts to rebuild productive relations,” Rubio stated in a filing, noting similar complications in Libya’s internal politics. The situation is particularly sensitive in Djibouti, home to the U.S.’s sole African military base, where deportees are currently detained at a naval facility. The administration warns that holding these individuals—described as dangerous criminals—in such a strategic location poses significant risks.

The flight, which departed Texas with eight migrants from countries including Myanmar, Vietnam, and Cuba, was halted after lawyers argued the deportations violated existing court orders. The Justice Department fired back, asserting that the deportees, who allegedly committed serious crimes, had full legal process and should be removed to protect U.S. interests. “This isn’t just about immigration—it’s about the President’s ability to steer foreign policy and national security,” a DOJ official emphasized.

Rubio’s broader concern is the precedent this sets. With South Sudan previously refusing repatriation and only recently showing cooperation, the court’s ruling could embolden other nations to resist U.S. deportation efforts. The administration has urged the court to reconsider, arguing the order imposes “burdensome constraints” on executive powers. If unresolved, this judicial tug-of-war could ripple across America’s global relationships.