Shocking! DC Appeals Court Actually Revives Trump's Expanded Expedited Removal Policy

CREDIT: Keith Gardner//US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Stop the presses! A federal appeals court actually ruled in favor of a Trump administration deportation policy. Wonders will never cease.

It seems that almost daily, judges are slapping on temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, or outright overturning the president’s policies, but on Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that he could resume a fast-track deportation process that a previous court had blocked while litigation on the merits of the policy proceeds.

Advertisement

The decision revived a pillar of President Trump’s mass deportation plans, after a lower court ruled last August that attempts to use the procedure to potentially remove millions of people without immigration hearings most likely violated their due process rights and risked wrongful detentions.

In a 2-to-1 vote, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that it did not violate immigrants’ rights to to expand a process to the outer limits of what is allowed under the law. Judge Justin R. Walker, a Trump appointee, wrote the majority opinion, joined by Judge Neomi Rao, also a Trump appointee. Judge Robert L. Wilkins, an Obama appointee, wrote in a dissent that he would have let the lower court’s ruling stand.

The appellate court's ruling, however, turned on far more than due process. The majority concluded that Congress carefully limited judicial review of expedited removal decisions and that the broad stay issued by the district court could not stand under the statutory framework Congress enacted.

The ruling was divided, as Politico reporter Kyle Cheney noted:

Advertisement

Underneath the final conclusion are some divisions / odd pairings.

Judge Walker (Trump) and Judge Wilkins (Obama) agreed that the district court had *authority* to stay the Day One decision. Judge Rao (Trump) disagreed.

Walker/Rao said the Day One decision did not violate due process. Judge Wilkins disagreed, dissenting in part from the overall ruling.


JUDGY: Judge Blocks Flights to Reunite Guatemalan Children With Parents—Even As They Were Boarding the Planes

Gavin Newsom Cheers As Federal Judge Torpedoes DOJ's Tim Walz Probe


Trump campaigned on enforcing border security and removing illegal aliens — especially criminals — from the homeland, but courts have been stepping in constantly to reject his policies. One of the measures the administration adopted to try to clean up the mess that Joe Biden left was to expand the use of expedited removal:

[The] expedited removal process has for nearly three decades been used to quickly return migrants apprehended at the border. But in January 2025, the administration expanded its scope ⁠to cover non-citizens apprehended anywhere in the U.S. who could not show that they had been in the country for two years.

The policy mirrored one the Trump administration adopted in 2019 that the Biden administration later rescinded [because of course they did].

After the immigrant rights advocacy group Make the Road New York sued, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb blocked the enforcement of those new policies [in August 2025], saying they violate the constitutional due process rights of migrants who could be apprehended anywhere in the U.S.

Advertisement

For now, at least, they can resume their operations and follow the challenged policy while the case returns to the district court.

Judge Boasberg has not yet weighed in. 

Editor’s Note: We voted for mass deportations, not mass amnesty. Help us continue to fight back against those trying to go against the will of the American people. 

Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

Recommended

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos