Controversial Deportations to South Sudan Raise Legal and Ethical Concerns

The DHS has disclosed information on individuals deported to South Sudan, all convicted of serious crimes. While a federal judge ruled that their removals violated due process rights, DHS officials emphasized the importance of victim narratives. Victim families are voicing concerns over expedited deportations and lack of transparency, particularly regarding several high-profile offenders, raising questions about legal rights and human safety.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has recently unveiled the identities of individuals on a removal flight to South Sudan, all of whom have been convicted of serious crimes in the United States. This controversial flight has raised concerns, particularly from victims’ families regarding the expedited removal process. Notably, a federal judge ruled that this flight contravened a previous order designed to protect migrant rights.

On May 20, a chartered removal flight took off for South Sudan carrying eight individuals who have all faced significant criminal convictions, including murder and sexual offenses. Judge Brian Murphy of the Massachusetts federal court highlighted that the removals did not allow enough time for these individuals to voice concerns about their deportation. He argued that the lack of opportunity for a proper legal response may constitute a violation of due process.

In his ruling on May 21, Judge Murphy mandated that those onboard the flight remain in U.S. custody while their credible fear assessments are processed. The judge pointed out that South Sudan plans to send these men back to their home countries, potentially exposing them to further violence and instability. He did not specify where these individuals should remain during this period, only suggesting a possible Holiday Inn.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin pushed back against the media’s focus on the deportations, insisting reporters rather highlight the victims of the crimes committed by these men. She characterized the individuals being sent as “monsters” and emphasized the severe harm they inflicted on innocent people. “Do your job, we gave you the names of these monsters, tell the stories of the innocent Americans they victimized,” McLaughlin stated.

Several victims’ families are now grappling with the ramifications of this flight. One such case involves Thongxay Nilakout, a Laotian citizen who fatally shot a German tourist in 1994. The victim’s daughter, Birte Pfleger, who had opposed Nilakout’s parole earlier this year, expressed outrage over the haste of his deportation to a country engulfed in violence and famine. Pfleger stated, “Due process has been violated… I am afraid for the safety of everyone in this country.”

Kyaw Mya, an Iowa resident and a Burmese national, is also included in the flight. He was convicted of lewd acts with a minor in 2019 and has been fighting his deportation, claiming he did not fully understand the implications of his plea deal on his immigration status. His attorney, Christopher Clausen, has struggled to maintain contact with Mya since March 2025, raising concerns over an immigrant facing deportation to a nation in which he has no familiarity. Clausen remarked, “It seems odd to me that a person who is a citizen of Burma could be getting sent to Sudan.”

The complete list of individuals removed includes various offenders, from murderers to sex offenders, with some sentenced to life in prison for their crimes. Among these are residents from countries like Cuba, Mexico, and Vietnam, each with an array of serious convictions, demonstrating the gravity of their offenses. The expeditious removal of these individuals has stirred significant debate on the intersection of justice, immigration, and human rights as families deal with the consequences of their swift deportation.

In moving forward with the removal flight to South Sudan, the Department of Homeland Security coincides with a backdrop of serious crimes committed by the individuals onboard, which has sparked widespread concern. A federal ruling emphasizing the right to due process complicates the narrative, raising fundamental questions about the legalities of such swift deportations. Families of victims express deep distress regarding the government’s methods, particularly around the lack of communication and opportunity for objection. The situation underscores the challenges surrounding criminal justice and immigration policy in the United States.

Original Source: www.usatoday.com