This came after the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Trump can deport eight undocumented immigrants with significant criminal records to South Sudan, overturning a lower court judge who claimed he still had the authority to prevent the removals despite a previous order.
Mr. Ter Manyang Gatwech, Executive Director of the Center for Peace and Advocacy (CPA), stated that the decision called into question the country’s sovereignty, and that these immigrants are unwelcome without proper legal and diplomatic coordination.
“This decision raises serious concerns about the violation of South Sudan’s sovereignty and the principles of international law,” he said.
“South Sudan, as a sovereign nation, should not be a recipient of individuals without proper legal and diplomatic coordination,” Manyang added.
According to the activist, deporting offenders to South Sudan without prior consultation violates international cooperation principles and threatens the integrity of South Sudan’s judicial system.
Mr. Manyang urged the administration to clarify the legal foundation and rationale for this ruling.
“The CPA strongly urges the Government of South Sudan, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, to immediately seek clarification from the United States regarding the legal basis and rationale behind this ruling,”
He also stated that good communication is critical to ensuring the country’s sovereignty and international rights are protected.
“We call on both the United States and South Sudan to engage through appropriate diplomatic channels to resolve this matter in accordance with international human rights standards and mutual respect,”
However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation is yet to comment on this matter.
The high court ruling means that the eight migrants, who for weeks have been living in a cargo container on a U.S. military base in Djibouti while they awaited their fate, can now be fully deported to South Sudan.
Judge Brian Murphy had ruled that immigrants being deported to so-called third countries other than their original homes deserved extra due process hearings. Using that decision, he then ordered a halt to the deportations to South Sudan, saying those eight migrants didn’t get the full due process.
The justices late last month issued a block on his original due process ruling, but Judge Murphy had insisted that it didn’t affect the eight migrants.
The high court Thursday said it did.
“Our June 23 order stayed the April 18 preliminary injunction in full. The May 21 remedial order cannot now be used to enforce an injunction that our stay rendered unenforceable,” the justices said in an unsigned order.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, arguing that the court was bending itself to deliver on Mr. Trump’s requests.
“Today’s order clarifies only one thing: Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial,” she said.
She said the high court shouldn’t have considered the Trump request at all, saying it should have gone through the lower courts.
She said the result of the ruling is that the eight immigrants’ rights will be violated.
“What the government wants to do, concretely, is send the eight noncitizens it illegally removed from the United States from Djibouti to South Sudan, where they will be turned over to the local authorities without regard for the likelihood that they will face torture or death,” she said.
