President Trump’s administration is using a little-known legal motion to remove asylum-seekers without a hearing to unfamiliar, third countries like Ecuador and Uganda. Thousands of immigrants who entered legally during the Biden administration now find themselves facing deportation as Trump dismantles regulations his predecessor put in place. Immigration practitioners need to understand this enforcement tactic and how to challenge it.
What changed
A Venezuelan farmer named Juan Pabon, his wife, and two young daughters downloaded the CBP One app and filled out the necessary forms to enter the U.S. and apply for asylum, waiting for their appointment while living on the street or in the homes of Mexicans in Juárez. The Trump administration is using a legal motion (known as “pretermission”) to order their removal to Ecuador—a country they’ve never been to—without a hearing.
The case illustrates a broader enforcement pattern. Pabon and his family are among thousands of immigrants who entered legally during the Biden administration and now find themselves in the crossfire as Trump dismantles regulations. Those who followed the federal CBP One process are now facing removal orders bypassing asylum hearings entirely.
Why it matters
This tactic raises critical legal concerns for practitioners:
- Due Process: Removal orders issued without a hearing violate fundamental procedural fairness and may be challengeable under the Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional due process principles.
- Third-Country Removals: Ordering removal to countries where asylum seekers have never lived (not their countries of origin) raises questions about the validity of “safe third country” designations and whether such countries have agreed to receive these individuals.
- CBP One Reliance: Practitioners should understand that legal entry via CBP One no longer guarantees an asylum hearing under the current administration, even though it did under Biden.
- Class-Action Potential: The pattern of “thousands” facing this same tactic may support challenges as a class or group.
Way forward
If you or a client faces a pretermission removal order:
- Do not ignore the order. Request a bond hearing immediately; pretermission orders can sometimes be stayed pending judicial review.
- File a habeas corpus petition in federal district court challenging the removal as lacking due process. Cite Rafidi v. Haines, 555 F.3d 314 (5th Cir. 2009), and related case law on the right to an asylum hearing.
- Document CBP One entry: Gather all evidence that your client followed the Biden-era CBP One procedure, appointment confirmations, and any communications showing reliance on federal procedures.
- Investigate the third country: If removal is ordered to an unfamiliar third country, research whether that country has agreed to accept U.S. removals and whether conditions there pose a risk to your client’s safety.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information reflects one journalist’s reporting on a specific case and enforcement pattern; policy can change without notice. Do not rely on this article alone to advise clients. Consult a licensed immigration attorney and verify all claims against the primary source linked above and current case law before filing any motion or response.