Appeals Court Upholds Block on Trump's Expedited Deportation Expansion

A federal appeals court has upheld a nationwide injunction against the Trump administration's plan to expand expedited deportations to immigrants detained far from the U.S. border. In a 2–1 decision, the D.C. Circuit panel confirmed Judge Jia Cobb's ruling from August 29, 2025, which was prompted by a lawsuit from the nonprofit organization Make the Road New York. The court found that the administration's approach likely violates due process rights, particularly for individuals who may have resided in the U.S. for extended periods.

Appeals Court Upholds Block on Trump’s Plan to Speed Up DeportationsThe Hill

The policy in question, outlined in a January 21, 2025 memo from the acting Secretary of Homeland Security, aimed to broaden the expedited removal process to include individuals who had crossed the border at any point in the last two years, regardless of their current location. This would have affected cities such as Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, New York, and St. Louis. Under this plan, individuals unable to prove two years of continuous U.S. residence would face immediate deportation without a court hearing.

Appeals Court Upholds Block on Trump’s Plan to Speed Up Deportations

The appeals court expressed significant concerns regarding the potential for wrongful deportations under the proposed policy. The judges noted that the expedited process does not adequately inform detainees of their rights or the criteria that could exempt them from immediate removal. The majority opinion highlighted that the policy places the burden on individuals to prove their residency status, which could lead to erroneous deportations. Judge Cobb's ruling specifically stated that the administration's method of handling cases far from the border lacked necessary due-process safeguards.

Appeals Court Upholds Block on Trump’s Plan to Speed Up Deportations

In response to the ruling, the court emphasized the importance of protecting individuals who may have lived in the U.S. for years from being subjected to rapid deportation without proper legal recourse. The administration retains the ability to use expedited removals at the border, but the ruling restricts its application to individuals in the interior of the country while the legal challenges continue.

The Hill

Critics of the expedited deportation policy argue that it undermines the rights of long-term residents and fails to provide adequate legal protections. The majority of the judges pointed out that the policy could lead to serious risks of erroneous summary removals, particularly for those who have established lives in the U.S. for more than two years.

The Hill

Further legal arguments regarding the merits of the case are scheduled for December, as the administration seeks to defend its policy amid ongoing scrutiny and opposition from advocacy groups. The outcome of these proceedings could have significant implications for immigration enforcement practices in the United States.

The Hill