A federal judge ordered the return of a Guatemalan migrant deported without due process; Trump administration arranges charter flight.

Trump Administration Responds to Court Order on Migrant Deportation

The Trump administration has begun efforts to return a Guatemalan immigrant who was erroneously deported in March, following a federal judge's order citing due process violations. The migrant, identified as O.C.G., was removed from the United States without being given the opportunity to request protection under U.S. asylum laws.

The Justice Department notified the court on Wednesday that officials are working to bring O.C.G. back to the U.S. via a charter flight arranged through Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Air Charter Operations. The filing follows a ruling last week by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, who found that O.C.G. was deported to Mexico unlawfully and ordered the administration to “take all immediate steps” to secure his return.

Judge Murphy emphasized that O.C.G. had not received a reasonable fear interview—a process designed to assess whether a migrant faces risks of torture or persecution if returned to a specific country. According to legal filings, O.C.G. had been previously kidnapped and raped in Mexico but was not given a chance to raise those fears before his deportation.

“In general, this case presents no special facts or legal circumstances, only the banal horror of a man being wrongfully loaded onto a bus and sent back to a country where he was allegedly just raped and kidnapped,” Murphy wrote in his Friday opinion. He added that ensuring the man's return “poses a vanishingly small cost to make sure we can still claim to live up to that ideal.”

Legal Fallout and Broader Implications

The Department of Homeland Security had previously requested amendments to the court’s directive, but Judge Murphy rejected the appeal, reinforcing the administration’s obligation to reverse the removal. The case marks the first known instance in which the Trump administration appears to comply with a court order to return a wrongfully deported migrant.

Elsewhere, similar rulings have emerged. In Maryland, a U.S. judge ordered the return of a young migrant deported to El Salvador, ruling that the removal violated a settlement agreement. Additionally, Judge Paula Xinis has clashed with federal officials over the deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant and alleged MS-13 member, whose deportation has been acknowledged as a procedural error.

Despite these judicial mandates, the administration has not publicly committed to applying similar reversals in other disputed deportation cases. The Department of Homeland Security continues to defend its enforcement practices, with a spokesperson stating, “America’s asylum system was never intended to be used as a de facto amnesty program or a catch-all, get-out-of-deportation-free card.”

It remains unclear how many other deportations may face legal scrutiny or reversal in light of recent rulings. Legal experts and immigrant rights advocates are watching closely to see whether this case signals a broader shift in federal deportation practices or remains an isolated compliance effort.