US judge temporarily blocks deportation of detained Afghans to Afghanistan or Pakistan
A US federal judge has temporarily barred the government from deporting detained Afghan nationals to Afghanistan or Pakistan until Saturday 7 November, after the government told the court it had no deportation flights planned this week. US District Judge Valerie Caproni's order on Tuesday held officials to that assurance. About 150 Afghans — among them people who served alongside US forces and their relatives — had been set to fly from Louisiana to Pakistan on Election Day, with onward transport to Afghanistan, according to the government's own earlier court filings. The temporary order decides nothing about whether the removals are lawful; the government must respond to the lawsuit on Thursday 5 November.
Checking in progress
This story is still being checked. Claims below are published as claims — never dressed as facts — and each one moves only when the evidence earns it.
- Collecting reportsDone
- Grouping the versionsDone
- Checking claims4 of 4 claims checked
- 4Human gateWe are here
4 of 4 claims checked so far · step 4 of 4: Human gate
Key points
- Temporary means temporary: Judge Caproni's restraining order bars Afghan deportations to Afghanistan or Pakistan only through Saturday 7 November, and rules nothing about their lawfulness.
- The order holds ICE to its own courtroom assurance — no planned or confirmed flights this week — which sits uneasily beside ICE's earlier filings scheduling a first-week-of-November flight via Pakistan to Afghanistan.
- About 150 Afghans were set to fly from Louisiana on Election Day, including people who served alongside US forces and their relatives, on the advocates' account.
What happened
The case, brought by Project Rousseau for Afghan clients facing final removal orders, turns on a route the administration's own filings describe: a charter from Alexandria, Louisiana, to Pakistan, then onward transport into Taliban-ruled Afghanistan — a country the United States does not recognise diplomatically and warns its own citizens not to travel to. Many of the would-be passengers came through the asylum system; in September immigration judges denied 94.5% of decided asylum cases, the highest rate in nearly three decades, on Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse data cited by USA Today.
The UN Human Rights Office reported last year that Afghans forced home from Iran and Pakistan had been tortured, arbitrarily detained and threatened because of who they were or the work they once did; Afghanistan's rulers denied those findings. That documented risk is why the congressional letter argued the legal duty not to return people to torture cannot be avoided by routing the flight through a third country.
Both sides, in their own words
Both sides heard. Neither believed for free. Publishing a side's version is not endorsing it — the claim checks below are where verdicts live.
Side A · Those seeking to stop the removals
- The United States promised to stand by Afghans who risked their lives for US forces, and sending them to the Taliban breaks that promise (Rep. Scott Peters, who led the congressional letter).
- Advocates say many of those facing removal have strong asylum cases that were never meaningfully heard, and that returnees face torture, detention and killing (Human Rights First; UN reporting cited by USA Today).
Side B · The administration's position
- ICE told the court there are 'no planned or confirmed chartered or commercial flights' for deporting Afghan nationals this week, and that such flights take weeks to arrange (a senior ICE official, via government counsel in court).
- The Department of Homeland Security 'does not comment on prospective removal operations, including flight schedules, passenger manifests, destinations, or individual case details' (DHS statement).
Independently verified
US District Judge Valerie Caproni, of the Southern District of New York, issued a temporary restraining order on Tuesday 3 November barring the government from deporting Afghan nationals to Afghanistan or Pakistan through Saturday 7 November. The judge wrote that the government 'has effectively represented that no Afghanistan nationals will be deported from the United States to Afghanistan or Pakistan this week', and held it to that representation after a senior ICE official, relayed through government counsel, said the agency had 'no planned or confirmed chartered or commercial flights' for Afghans this week and that such flights take weeks to arrange. A deportation flight carrying about 150 Afghans had been scheduled to leave Alexandria, Louisiana, at about 7 p.m. on Election Day, bound for Pakistan, according to #AfghanEvac founder Shawn VanDiver. The government's own earlier filings are at odds with its no-flights assurance: last month ICE officials and federal prosecutors told courts in Texas and Oklahoma that Afghan detainees had been scheduled for a flight departing the first week of November, and an ICE supervisor in Virginia swore a filing that its final destination would be Pakistan, with 'further transport onward to Afghanistan'. Among those facing deportation are people who served alongside the US military and relatives of those who did, as well as women, LGBTQ+ people and members of religious and ethnic minorities, according to the attorneys and advocates in the case. Before the hearing, 66 Democratic members of Congress urged the administration to ground the flight, writing that the United States is bound not to return anyone to a country where they would face torture and that 'that obligation does not disappear because a flight makes a stop along the way'; veterans who served beside Afghan troops campaigned against the removal, and more than 900 people contacted officials. The Department of Homeland Security declined to comment on prospective removal operations. Even the Taliban's foreign ministry expressed 'serious concern' at the reports, warning third countries not to 'bargain over the fate of another country's nationals'. The order decides nothing about whether the deportations are lawful. The government is due to respond to the lawsuit — brought by the legal nonprofit Project Rousseau for Afghan clients — on Thursday 5 November. The plan to route Afghans through Pakistan has not been withdrawn, VanDiver said, and ICE has told some detainees the flight will now leave in a week or two; the government has released no details of the flight or of any agreement with Pakistan.Not yet verified
Nothing outstanding.Claim by claim
Why this label: The order's own wording, as reported by USA Today (read in full in this pass, from the courtroom and court records) and in matching terms by AP and AFP reports (queue #1548). The order is temporary on its face — the qualifier is part of the news and is carried in the headline, slug, SEO title and summary.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: The flight plan and the filing contradiction are USA Today's reporting from court records (read in full). The headcount is approximate in every source: USA Today says 'some 150' and 'about 150 other people'; the New York Times figure it cites is more than 150, and a US official told CBS News nearly 200 — the range is disclosed here rather than a single figure stated as exact. The passenger composition is the advocates' account, attributed as such.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: Each element is that speaker's own stated position: the lawmakers' letter (Rep. Peters's office published it), the advocates' campaign and the Taliban statement are all in USA Today's report (read in full), and DHS's refusal to comment is its own statement in the same report.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Show all claims (1 more)
Why this label: The order's limited scope is plain from its wording (it holds the government to its own representation for this week only). The response date and the not-withdrawn plan are USA Today's reporting; the week-or-two timing is VanDiver's account of what ICE told detainees, attributed to him.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
What we know / what we don't know yet
What we know
- What the court ordered and why — a temporary bar through 7 November holding the government to its own no-flights-this-week representation — from the order's wording in USA Today's courtroom reporting, matched by AP and AFP.
- That a flight of about 150 Afghans from Louisiana via Pakistan was planned for this week, from the government's own earlier court filings as reported by USA Today.
What we don't know yet
- The exact number of people covered — reports range from about 150 to nearly 200, and no passenger manifest has been published.
- The terms of any US arrangement with Pakistan for onward transfer — the government has released no details.
- What happens when the order expires on 7 November — whether ICE schedules a new flight, and whether a court then rules on the removals' lawfulness; the government's response to the lawsuit is due 5 November.
Why it matters
For about 150 people, the order is the difference between staying in the United States and being delivered, via Pakistan, to the Taliban — among them, on the advocates' account, people who served beside American troops. Beyond them, the case tests whether a government can meet its duty not to return people to torture by stopping the flight in a third country, and it will be watched by every future local ally deciding whether to trust an American promise.
Background
The Taliban retake Afghanistan as US troops withdraw; Afghans who aided US forces are among those who flee or later seek asylum in the United States.
ICE officials tell courts in Texas and Oklahoma that Afghan detainees are scheduled on a flight in the first week of November; an ICE supervisor swears its destination is Pakistan, with onward transport to Afghanistan.
Hours before the flight's scheduled Election Day departure, the government tells a Manhattan courtroom it has no planned flights this week; Judge Caproni's temporary order holds it to that through 7 November.
Update history
No silent edits. Every change is written here, with its time.
- Latest
Story published in Checking state as a brief from queue #1548 (The Hindu). JUDGE AUDIT (outcome-word rule): the order is temporary, and 'temporarily' survives intact in the headline, the slug ('temporarily-blocks'), the SEO title and the summary — the order bars this week's removals only and decides nothing about lawfulness, which the story states plainly. Every number is traced: the about-150 headcount is carried as a range (about 150 to nearly 200 across sources) because the reports disagree; the 66 lawmakers and 900+ contacts are USA Today's figures. The administration's position (ICE's assurance; DHS's refusal to comment) and the Taliban's statement are carried as positions, never as findings. The hero is a labelled file photo of the Moynihan Courthouse, the court that issued the order.