Federal Appeals Court Allows Trump to Resume Nationwide Expedited Deportations

A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration may resume nationwide expedited removals of undocumented migrants, overturning a lower court decision that had temporarily blocked the expanded policy. The ruling represents a significant victory for the administration, which has positioned expedited removal — a process that allows for swift deportation without a court hearing — as a cornerstone of its mass deportation efforts.

Previously, expedited removal was limited to migrants caught at or near the border shortly after crossing, or those arriving by sea. In January 2026, President Donald Trump expanded the policy to apply to undocumented migrants anywhere in the United States. Under the expanded policy, immigration agents have been detaining migrants from courthouses and other locations and removing them within days.

The majority opinion, written by Judge Justin R. Walker and joined by Judge Neomi Rao — both Trump appointees — held that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the expedited removal process violated due process rights. Walker argued that migrants receive notice of removal proceedings and an opportunity to respond, and that there is no constitutional requirement to inform individuals that they may be exempt if they have been in the country for more than two years. The dissenting judge, an Obama appointee, sided with the challengers.

The ruling vacated an August 2026 order by U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, who had found that the administration failed to develop adequate procedures to prevent wrongful deportations. Cobb cited "substantial evidence" of errors, including cases of individuals who had lived in the U.S. for far more than two years but were still ordered removed under expedited proceedings. Walker acknowledged such errors but attributed them to individual officer mistakes rather than flaws in the policy itself.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which represented plaintiffs in the case, condemned the ruling. Anand Balakrishnan, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, stated that the decision "undermines the fundamental principle that people receive due process when the government seeks to deport them" and subjects individuals to an "unfair and error-prone system." The Justice Department had argued in October that the lower court's block was an "egregious error" that deprived the administration of an essential tool to address what it described as an unprecedented surge in illegal immigration.