A federal judge has ordered the Biden administration to return a Guatemalan man wrongly deported to Mexico, despite explicit legal protections, reigniting scrutiny over White House compliance with immigration rulings.
At a Glance
- A Guatemalan asylum-seeker, O.C.G., was deported to Mexico despite a court-ordered protection against removal.
- O.C.G., who is gay, previously suffered rape and extortion in Mexico after fleeing persecution in Guatemala.
- Judge Brian Murphy ruled the deportation violated due process and ordered the man’s return to the U.S.
- The Biden administration has repeatedly faced legal rebukes over wrongful deportations.
- O.C.G. is back in the U.S. but remains in federal immigration custody.
Judicial Reversal Amid Systemic Failures
In a stinging rebuke of federal immigration authorities, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy condemned the wrongful deportation of a gay Guatemalan migrant, O.C.G., calling the act devoid of “any semblance of due process.” Despite a court-granted withholding of removal—a legal status preventing deportation to countries where a person faces persecution—U.S. officials deported O.C.G. to Mexico, where he had previously been raped and held for ransom.
The deportation sparked outrage among immigration advocates and legal experts, many of whom argue it reflects a broader pattern of the Biden administration flouting court rulings. “The likelihood that O.C.G. is correct in asserting that his due-process rights were violated,” Judge Murphy wrote, “has long hovered near certainty.”
Watch a report: Immigration judge orders deported gay man returned.
Policy Breakdown and Political Fallout
This case is not isolated. Federal courts have previously intervened to reverse deportations, such as in the case of Venezuelan asylum-seeker Kilmar Abrego Garcia. According to immigration attorney Trina Realmuto, the return of O.C.G. marks the first known instance since Biden’s inauguration that DHS complied with a district court order to facilitate a migrant’s return.
The administration’s mishandling of this case has drawn criticism from both sides of the political aisle. While some conservative voices accuse the White House of lawlessness, others note the contradiction of publicly championing human rights while sending asylum-seekers into danger. In a particularly harsh rebuke, the White House labeled Judge Murphy a “far-left activist”—a claim legal analysts dismiss as political theater given Murphy’s record of centrist rulings.
A System That Punishes the Lawful
Though O.C.G. has now reentered the U.S., his future remains uncertain. He is being held in federal immigration detention, where he faces continued bureaucratic limbo. His story underscores a broader irony in U.S. immigration policy: individuals who follow legal channels often encounter harsher outcomes than those who evade them entirely.
As border authorities continue to process record numbers of migrants, critics say the administration must confront its own internal failures before attempting broader reforms. Until then, cases like O.C.G.’s suggest that even those who play by the rules risk being caught in a system that seems increasingly detached from its own legal obligations.
