The U.S. Supreme Court on 26 June tightened the rules governing when migrants may challenge deportation orders, ruling 5–4 that the 30-day period for filing a petition for federal court review begins when a final removal order is issued, even if later proceedings determine where the person can be sent. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority in Riley v. Bondi, acknowledged practical concerns but said the statutory text leaves “no room” for a later deadline. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Neil Gorsuch, called the requirement “illogical,” noting that it forced Jamaican national Pierre Riley to file an appeal months before officials decided whether he risked torture if expelled to his home country. Separately, the Court this week lifted a lower-court injunction that had blocked the removal of eight criminal aliens to countries other than their own, allowing the Trump administration’s third-country transfer program to resume. Solicitor General D. John Sauer has asked the justices to rebuke U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy, whom the government accuses of defying the Court’s emergency order by continuing to hold the migrants at a naval base in Djibouti. The pair of rulings strengthens the administration’s drive to accelerate deportations. In a related development, the Justice Department told a federal judge that it plans to prosecute Kilmar Abrego Garcia—who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador in March—on human-smuggling charges in Tennessee before seeking to remove him to an unspecified third country. Immigration lawyers say the moves signal a broader reliance on transfers to nations with which the United States has limited diplomatic or human-rights guarantees.