Appeals Court Hands Trump Admin. a Win in High-Stakes Immigration Case

By Susie Moore | 7:40 PM on March 11, 2026



John Joseph Moakley Courthouse, Boston, MA. (Credit: Wiki Commons/4300streetcar)

We've seen several cases involving the Trump administration that have called to mind a ping-pong match, but this one might be the most ping-pongy of all. The case is styled D.V.D. v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, and it's already made multiple trips to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, along with a trip to the Supreme Court that resulted in a stay and an order clarifying that.

It involves six illegal aliens who were convicted of serious crimes (homicide, robbery, etc.) and whose own home countries refused to take them back, so the administration sought to have them removed to a third country. Massachusetts District Court Judge Brian Murphy has repeatedly issued orders thwarting that, the latest coming on February 25, 2026, restricting DHS’s ability to deport illegal aliens to third countries not originally designated in their immigration proceedings.

The administration immediately appealed that to the 1st Circuit, and on Wednesday, the appellate court temporarily blocked that order, granting the administration's request for an administrative stay while it considers the government’s request for a longer pause pending appeal.

Here's a bit more of the backstory:

Murphy's Feb. 25 order granted partial summary judgment against DHS, finding that the agency’s third-country removal practices were inconsistent with federal immigration law and administrative law requirements. Murphy concluded that illegal aliens facing removal to a country not previously identified in their immigration proceedings must receive notice and an opportunity to raise fear-of-torture claims tied to that country. His ruling effectively blocked the government from carrying out such removals without additional procedural safeguards.

In its brief, two-paragraph order, the 1st Circuit granted the government’s request for an immediate administrative stay, thereby pausing the district court ruling while the panel considers a motion for a stay pending appeal. Now, it's important to bear in mind that an administrative stay is simply a temporary procedural measure used by an appellate court to preserve the status quo while they review emergency motions — and they aren't necessarily a guarantee as to which way the appellate court ultimately will rule on the request for a stay pending appeal.

The court indicated it intends to rule on the stay request promptly — there's no request for either party to brief the matter more fully — so we'll probably see a ruling from the 1st Circuit within the next few days.

Here's what's at stake with this case: The key point of contention is DHS’s authority to deport illegal aliens to third countries that were not the original destination in their immigration proceedings. If the district court ruling stands, that will significantly affect how DHS conducts removals when illegal aliens cannot be returned to their home countries.

So now, we wait to see whether the 1st Circuit grants a stay pending appeal, allowing the DHS policy to remain in place during litigation, or denies the stay, which would reinstate the district court restrictions while the appeal proceeds. Either way, it's a safe bet this one winds up back at SCOTUS before too long.

For now, the 1st Circuit's order means that Murphy's ruling will not take effect. We will, of course, continue to monitor the case and provide an update once the 1st Circuit rules.

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/0...-case-n2200123