Appeals Court Clears Path for Nationwide Expedited Deportations

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration may resume expedited deportations nationwide, reversing a lower court injunction that had blocked the policy. The D.C. Circuit's 2-1 decision vindicates the administration's immigration enforcement strategy and reveals how judicial appointments shape the fate of border policy.

Three judges split along the predictable partisan lines. Judge Justin R. Walker, a Trump appointee, authored the majority opinion in Make the Road New York v. Mullin, vacating the district court's stay. Fellow Trump appointee Judge Neomi Rao joined in concurrence. Obama appointee Judge Robert L. Wilkins dissented.

"Thirty years ago, Congress created a new process for deporting illegal aliens," Walker wrote in the June 23 opinion. "It is called 'expedited removal.' Unlike other statutorily required procedures that can take years to complete, expedited removal often takes just a few days."

Congress established expedited removal through the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, leaving the executive branch free to determine its scope. The Trump administration's January 2025 directive pushed the policy to its statutory maximum, applying it nationwide to anyone unable to prove two years of continuous presence.

"As for whether to designate other aliens for expedited removal, Congress let the Executive decide," Walker stated. "And for many years, while some were designated, others were not. But that changed in January 2025 when the Executive expanded expedited removal to the maximum extent allowed by Congress."

Immigration officers now issue removal orders without a hearing before an immigration judge. The process targets inadmissible aliens lacking valid documentation who have been in the country for less than two years. Certain categories escape the policy: visa overstayers, minors, anyone admitted or paroled, and anyone who can prove two consecutive years of continuous presence. Asylum-seekers trigger a credible fear interview.

The numbers illustrate the scale of enforcement under the current administration. DHS claims over 900,000 illegal immigrants have been arrested since early 2025, with 2.2 million people having self-deported voluntarily. Foreign deportation flights averaged roughly 200 to 300 per month over the past 18 months. Domestic ICE shuffle flights surged from roughly 250 per month in 2024 to more than 1,000 per month in 2026. Central America accounted for 40 to 60 percent of all deportation flights.

DHS General Counsel James Percival welcomed the ruling. "For years, DHS has arbitrarily limited expedited removal to 14 days even though it applies to illegal aliens who entered the country illegally within the last two years," Percival said. "Today, the D.C. Circuit vindicated our decision to apply the law as written. It's not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home!"

The constitutional question turned on which legal standard governed the case. Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, applied the Matthews v. Eldridge due process standard to grant a nationwide stay in August 2025, finding the policy created a significant risk of wrongful deportation. The majority applied the less demanding Mullane v. Central Hanover standard, requiring only notice and an opportunity to respond.

"The constitutional requirement is notice of the action the government is taking and the grounds for it, plus an opportunity to respond," Walker wrote. "It is not a requirement that the government explain how the individual might prevail."

Judge Wilkins dissented, arguing the lower court correctly applied the higher due process standard. "A procedure that can result in persons being deported pursuant to the expedited removal statute without even being asked how long they have been in the country might satisfy due process for persons encountered at the border, but it is woefully inadequate for persons encountered in the interior of the country," Wilkins wrote.

He noted DHS has not disputed that some people were deported despite having been in the country for more than two years.

ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Anand Balakrishnan called the system unfair and error-prone. He argued the ruling undermines the fundamental principle that people receive due process when the government seeks to deport them. The group is exploring next steps.

The court majority directly addressed those concerns. "To be sure, the record contains evidence that some aliens have been erroneously subjected to expedited removal despite having been present for more than two years," Walker wrote. "If so, that's illegal. But the cause there would be individual officers' failure to follow the law, not defects in the written directives under review or the procedures they incorporate."

The policy has historical precedent. The 2019 expansion during Trump's first term applied to only 21 aliens before a court enjoined it. The Biden administration rescinded the expansion in March 2022, reverting to 2004 limits. The January 2025 designation restored the full nationwide expansion and rescinded the Biden rescission.

Nineteen states plus the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief supporting Make the Road New York. The Federation for American Immigration Reform filed in support of DHS. The partisan divide extended beyond the courtroom, reflecting the broader national debate over immigration enforcement and judicial authority.

"At most, the district court's findings show that Congress's expedited screening system operates quickly and with practical constraints, features the statute itself contemplates," Walker concluded. "They do not show that the challenged directives deprive aliens of a meaningful opportunity to be heard."

For millions of Americans who watch illegal immigration strain local resources, overwhelm schools, and depress wages, the ruling delivers what they have long demanded: a government willing to enforce the laws Congress wrote.