The Unknown of Status: Immigrants to Third World Countries
Guiselle Delgadillo
Millions of immigrants have been deported to third-world countries that are not their places of origin. President Donald Trump proclaimed at the United Nations General Assembly: “While others have ignored threats, I have confronted them. Others have talked about courage; America has shown it.” During the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly, President Donald Trump declared under his leadership that America is “stronger than ever.” So far, “25,000+ people have been sent to 29 countries,” which highlights the Trump administration’s bilateral agreement to send asylum seekers, refugees, and other immigrants to countries they have no ties to, causing fear and confusion among those facing the possibility of uncertain deportations.
Since February 2025, the United States has pursued an immigration plan that deports individuals who have no family or personal ties to the third-world country. The U.S. has committed around $420 million to secure the agreements, which was driven by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who emphasized that deportations are focused on “removing criminals from the US,” despite 75,000 people who have been arrested who did not have prior criminal records. Prior to this policy, there were no deportation agreements, and today the Trump Administration has signed agreements with more than 35 countries. These deportations have caused denial of opportunities, withdrawal of responsibility, and a lack of advance notice.
In exchange, the third-world countries from Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe are accepting money, visa restrictions, and other treatments from the government. While these amounts are not made public, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee minority report found that $32.3 million was provided to at least five foreign governments. Despite efforts, many individuals are not made aware of their deportation notice nor of their final country of destination anymore. Deportees are then stuck in prisons, camps, or hotels, and while the U.S. does not prohibit third-party deportations, the U.S. government is not following safeguards, which has led to unlawful processes under domestic and international law.
Many people arrived in the United States with the hopes of starting a new life away from terror. A man named Malick (not his real name) was sentimental about his deportation notice. After fleeing Senegal in 2023, he said, “I feel safe,” but three years later, his safety net became the worst situation despite being granted a “withholding of removal.” While Malick had this “protection,” many people without it were faced with worry because, despite not having criminal records, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has deported people without criminal records.
Women such as Nika, a 32-year-old Iranian, also recall the uproar she faced with U.S. immigration. After fleeing Iran, she imagined that escaping to the United States would be safer. Instead, Nika faced mistreatment from DHS officers after being arrested and having the handcuffs extremely tightened around her wrists. After facing over one year in an immigration detention center, she was released, re-arrested, and then deported to an unknown country. She stated, “I don’t know anything about Africa.”
Secrecy has remained abundant throughout this third-world deportation process. Despite happening since early 2025, the circulation of the cases is just now being exposed to the media. In many cases, the agreements made with the U.S. and the receiving country are only made “days before a deportation flight takes off.” By offering limited information, the deportations are also handled with tight security. For example, flights are guarded and made impossible for attorneys and detainees to remain in contact before being sent away to an unknown country where they can face torture, mistreatment, and physiological impacts.
Efforts such as J.G.G. v. Trump federal class-action and habeas corpus lawsuit began on March 14, 2025, over the Trump Administration’s unlawful invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. Under the law, the act is meant to give the president power to remove or restrain citizens of a foreign country who have “engaged in a declared war or invasion against the United States.” By definition, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenged the administration alongside the support of federal judges and the court of appeals because President Trump invoked the AEA to bypass the specific legal protections that are designed for fast-track removals, which are not aligned with the process that immigrants who have not committed a crime have to go through.
Despite the courts finding the policy was violating the ignored commands. In a social media post, Percival stated, “The First Circuit's ruling is not currently in effect. If you claim fear in your home country, DHS has the right to send you elsewhere.” As legal officials continue to fight back, many immigrants are left unsure about their future, reuniting with their families, and the conditions they will be in if they are sent back to their home country. More recently, on September 29, 2026, the Supreme Court accepted and will be reviewing the Trump Administration’s deportation requirements to finalize whether the policy is violating constitutional principles of due process. Evidently, these removals have limited the government’s obligations to screen for fear of prosecution, which the Supreme Court will be considering in December during its review.
For now, thousands are confined to U.S. measures that will continue to harm them if action isn’t taken against the inhumane experience people are facing. On a case-by-case basis, people facing the risks are being recommended to remain vigilant and cautious because deportation notices are becoming slimmer.
Comments