WASHINGTON — A coalition of Democratic lawmakers has urged the internal watchdogs of the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department to probe what they describe as an "unlawful and costly" policy under the Trump administration of deporting immigrants to third countries with which they have no prior ties. In a letter sent Tuesday and obtained exclusively by NBC News, Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, along with Reps. Delia Ramirez of Illinois and Troy Carter of Louisiana, and 26 other lawmakers, demanded a thorough investigation into the practice, which they likened to a human "smuggling operation."
The letter highlights concerns that the administration has been secretly deporting individuals to unfamiliar nations, often without notice, leaving many in precarious situations. "The Trump Administration has, with little or no notice, secretly deported individuals to countries they are not from, have no connection to, and sometimes have never heard of," the lawmakers wrote. This approach marks a significant shift from policies in previous administrations, where third-country deportations were rare and typically limited to specific circumstances.
The policy typically applies to immigrants who cannot be returned to their home countries due to legal protections, such as court orders barring removal because of dangers like torture, or when home nations refuse repatriation. According to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, an estimated 15,000 such deportations occurred between January 20, 2025, and December 31 of that year, with about 13,000 individuals sent to Mexico. "Very little is known about what has happened to the 15,000 or so individuals sent to third countries, nor is there systematic monitoring of compliance by partner countries," the institute noted in an analysis published last month.
A senior DHS official defended the practice in a statement, emphasizing that the administration "is utilizing all lawful options to carry out the largest deportation operation in history, just as President Trump promised." The State Department echoed this commitment, with a spokesperson stating Wednesday, "Implementing the Trump Administration’s immigration policies is a top priority for the Department of State. As Secretary Rubio has said, we remain unwavering in our commitment to end illegal and mass immigration and bolster America’s border security." Neither agency immediately responded to requests for comment on the lawmakers' letter, and the State Department declined to discuss diplomatic communications with other governments.
One high-profile case underscoring the controversies involves Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador in March despite a 2019 court order protecting him from return due to threats in his home country. The administration has since sought to send him to Liberia, marking the sixth country targeted for his removal. Abrego's attorney argues that he has designated Costa Rica as his preferred removal destination and claims the government's refusal is "retaliatory." The case was back in court Tuesday as the administration pushed forward with its plans.
The lawmakers' letter specifically requests details on how many individuals subject to third-country removals had court-ordered protections against return to their origins, and how many were subsequently sent back to those countries from the third nations. Court documents cited in the letter describe troubling outcomes in at least two instances. In one, a Guatemalan man granted protection from removal to Guatemala was deported to Mexico without notice; Mexican authorities then sent him back to Guatemala, where he now lives in hiding.
In another case, an El Salvadoran man protected under the U.N. Convention Against Torture was deported to Mexico last year. From there, he was driven to Guatemala and ultimately returned to El Salvador, according to U.S. court filings. His brother reported in the documents that upon arrival, police threatened to take him to CECOT, El Salvador's notorious megaprison known for human rights abuse allegations. "I have not been able to communicate with my brother at all. I am afraid that he is in CECOT, and I am afraid for my brother’s safety," the brother said.
Yael Schacher, director for the Americas and Europe at Refugees International, a nonprofit humanitarian organization, described the scale of these actions as unprecedented. "These have never been populations that any administration ever, Republican or Democrat, has targeted in this way," she said. At a Cabinet meeting last April, Secretary of State Marco Rubio openly discussed the strategy, stating, "We are working with other countries to say we want to send you some of the most despicable human beings to your countries. The further away from America, the better, so they can’t come back across the border. I’m not apologetic about it. We are doing that."
The letter also seeks information on whether DHS has threatened asylum-seekers with third-country deportations, what incentives the U.S. has offered accepting nations, how the government verifies that deportees won't face torture abroad, and the total costs of the policy. A Senate Democratic minority report estimates agreements with at least 27 countries, including El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, and Rwanda, with expenses likely exceeding $40 million, though exact figures remain undisclosed. DHS declined to provide data on the number of third-country deportations.
Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute, noted that while U.S. law allows third-country removals under certain conditions, the current implementation raises questions about compliance and transparency. "We’ve never seen it on this scale," Selee said, adding that previous administrations used the practice only in isolated cases. He also pointed to a broader deterrent effect: "It’s the fear of people thinking they might get deported somewhere else. ... It’s the sum of efforts that deter people by making it look like you could end up being sent anywhere."
The first known instance of the administration’s sending migrants to third countries came in the announcement last year that 240 Venezuelan migrants were sent to CECOT prison in El Salvador. The Trump administration accused the men of being gang members connected with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, claims their lawyers and families denied. The men were sent back to Venezuela from El Salvador in July as part of a prisoner swap between the two countries. Many of the men have said they suffered physical and psychological abuse while they were imprisoned in CECOT.
A New York Times investigation revealed that most of those sent to CECOT lacked criminal records in the U.S. or the region, with documented ties to Tren de Aragua appearing minimal; at least 32 of the more than 200 faced serious accusations or convictions. In February, a federal judge ordered the administration to allow Venezuelans sent to CECOT the option to return to the U.S. for immigration proceedings. Late last month, one such Venezuelan filed a $1.3 million lawsuit against the government.
According to Third Country Deportation Watch, a project by Refugees International and Human Rights First, nine individuals from other nations were sent to Cameroon in January, eight of whom had U.S. judicial protections against home-country removal. Schacher warned that some partner countries have histories of human rights abuses and corruption. As of March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement held more than 500 people in custody slated for third-country deportations, per a government declaration in an ongoing court challenge, with DHS indicating plans to target over 8,000 individuals.
The policy faces legal hurdles. In February, a federal judge deemed third-country removals illegal, mandating meaningful notice and opportunities to contest deportations. The administration appealed, keeping the practice active pending the outcome. Critics, including the lawmakers, argue it violates due process and international obligations, while supporters view it as essential for robust border enforcement.
Looking ahead, the investigation requested by Democrats could shed light on the policy's inner workings and human costs, potentially influencing future immigration debates. With the administration's deportation ambitions escalating, the balance between security measures and humanitarian protections remains a flashpoint in national discourse.