Sixty-six members of Congress sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin demanding the cancellation of deportation flights sending Afghan and Iranian nationals out of the United States, as the Trump administration moved ahead with plans to remove nearly 200 Afghans through a route that lands first in Pakistan.
A sworn declaration filed in federal court by a supervisory ICE deportation officer confirms that a charter flight originally scheduled to leave Alexandria, Louisiana, on Tuesday, Nov. 3, would land in Pakistan before transporting at least one Afghan national overland into Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The disclosure, made in litigation over a detainee's removal, has prompted emergency motions in at least two federal districts and drawn public objection from Afghanistan's Taliban-led Foreign Ministry itself.
As of Monday, no court had blocked the flights outright. One detainee was pulled from the flight list and released from ICE custody after a judge found his detention violated due process, while judges in Texas and Louisiana denied separate emergency requests, leaving the broader legal question of whether courts can intervene in the routing unresolved.
What the ICE Declaration Reveals
The sworn declaration came from Sergio Aguilar, a supervisory detention and deportation officer at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency responsible for carrying out removal orders. Aguilar said he had initially understood that the charter flight would land directly in Afghanistan but later learned Pakistan was the actual destination, with onward travel by land.
The filing came after U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff ordered federal officials to clarify whether the planned charter would fly directly to Afghanistan or make an intermediate stop in Pakistan. The case, Sadat v. Mullin, involves Said Mansor Sadat, a 30-year-old Afghan national who had been assigned to the flight.
A Route Complicated by the Absence of U.S.-Taliban Relations
The United States suspended operations at its embassy in Kabul in 2021 and has no formal diplomatic relations with the Taliban government that has controlled Afghanistan since the U.S. withdrawal. That absence of direct diplomatic ties complicates any effort to deport people straight to Afghanistan, which is part of why the flight plan routes through a third country first.
An attorney representing Sadat and a second Afghan client facing deportation, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, said both men were told separately that they would be flown to Pakistan on Tuesday and then moved overland toward the Afghan border. He said the men were given no information about who would handle that overland leg or how it would be carried out.
Court Fights Playing Out in Three States
The planned removals have surfaced in separate federal proceedings in Virginia, Texas and Louisiana, producing different outcomes so far.
In the Sadat case, the detainee was removed from the flight list and released from ICE custody after a judge ruled his continued detention violated his due process rights. His co-plaintiff was still awaiting a ruling on an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order as of Monday night.
Divergent Rulings in Texas and Louisiana
In Texas, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone noted in an Oct. 15 order that ICE had acknowledged detainee Basir Ahmad Ahmadi had been nominated for an 'Afghanistan removal mission tentatively scheduled for early November.' Ahmadi sought emergency relief arguing Pakistan could arrest him and hand him to Taliban authorities, but Cardone denied the request on Oct. 29, ruling the district court lacked jurisdiction to halt the removal.
In Louisiana, another Afghan national, Khaled Khaleeq, sought emergency intervention after learning through news reports and conversations with fellow detainees that he might be sent to Pakistan or Afghanistan. A federal judge denied that request on Oct. 30, though reconsideration notices have since been filed.
What Happens to Deportees Once They Leave Custody
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) declined to address the specific planned flights, citing operational security, but defended its general practice of removing people to third countries. A DHS spokesperson said deportees sent to a third country 'receive notice and assurances prior to their removal' and that ICE obtains diplomatic assurances from destination governments that deportees will be safe.
DHS did not say whether Pakistan had specifically agreed to accept the deportees or whether any assurances extend to their treatment during overland transport into Afghanistan. The spokesperson added a stark limit on the agency's responsibility: once someone leaves ICE custody, the agency considers its obligations ended.
Secretary of State Rubio was asked about the planned Afghan deportations at an Oct. 31 news conference and directed the question back to DHS. DHS, in turn, referred questions about third-country agreements to the State Department. The Pakistani embassy did not respond to requests for comment.
Reactions From Kabul and Congress
Afghanistan's Taliban-led Foreign Ministry publicly raised concern over reports that the United States intended to transfer Afghan nationals through Pakistan, calling for coordination and urging that the rights and dignity of Afghan citizens be respected.
Shawn VanDiver, a U.S. Navy veteran who leads the nonprofit #AfghanEvac, which supports Afghans who worked with the U.S. military, said handing families of American allies to Pakistan amounted to abandonment rather than enforcement.
The congressional letter, signed by 66 lawmakers, calls on Rubio and Mullin to cancel the deportation flights affecting both Afghan and Iranian nationals, though the publicly available reporting does not detail the letter's specific legal arguments.
Who Is Affected and What Remains Unknown
The affected population includes nearly 200 Afghan nationals currently in ICE custody on immigration violations, many of whom arrived after the 2021 fall of Kabul through a Biden-era resettlement program or on their own, including some who first traveled through Latin America before crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.
Key facts remain unconfirmed in the public record: whether Pakistan has agreed to accept the deportees, which government or entity would oversee the overland transfer into Afghanistan, and whether the Tuesday flight ultimately departed as scheduled.
Clinch Law Legal Analysis
Sources
This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration outcomes depend on individual facts and current law.
Afghan nationals in ICE custody face a new removal pathway: charter flights to Pakistan followed by overland transport to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. A sworn ICE declaration confirmed the routing, but DHS has not publicly confirmed whether Pakistan provided diplomatic assurances covering onward transportation and treatment inside Afghanistan. One detained Afghan, Said Mansor Sadat, was removed from the flight list and released after a judge found his continued detention violated due process rights, but at least two other detainees in Texas and Louisiana had emergency motions denied on jurisdictional or other grounds, with reconsideration efforts still pending. Sixty-six members of Congress have called on the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to cancel these flights for Afghans and Iranians.
The legal picture remains highly unsettled. Federal judges in multiple districts are handling individual challenges, reaching different procedural outcomes. DHS has stated that deportees sent to third countries receive notice and assurances, but it declined to specify whether Pakistan made such guarantees for this operation or whether protections extend beyond the moment ICE relinquishes custody. No court injunction blocking the flights is confirmed in the available record. Individuals with existing removal orders who believe they face persecution in Afghanistan should urgently consult immigration counsel about emergency motions, withholding-of-removal claims, or Convention Against Torture protections before any scheduled departure, as the timeline for these flights appears compressed and individual procedural rights vary significantly by case.
Questions Clients Are Asking#
Can ICE deport Afghan nationals to Pakistan instead of directly to Afghanistan?
A sworn ICE declaration confirmed plans for a charter flight landing in Pakistan with onward overland transport to Afghanistan. DHS defended third-country removal practices generally, stating deportees receive notice and assurances. However, DHS did not confirm whether Pakistan specifically provided such assurances for this operation, and the U.S. lacks diplomatic relations with the Taliban government, complicating direct removal to Afghanistan.
Have any courts blocked the deportation flights of Afghans through Pakistan?
Based on available reporting, no court has issued an injunction blocking the flights. In Texas, Judge Cardone denied emergency relief on Oct. 29, ruling the district court lacked jurisdiction to halt removal. In Louisiana, a judge denied emergency intervention on Oct. 30, though reconsideration notices have been filed. One detainee, Sadat, was released from ICE custody after a judge found his detention violated due process, but that ruling addressed detention, not the flight itself.
What protections exist for Afghans who fear persecution by the Taliban if deported?
Individuals with removal orders may seek withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture if they can demonstrate a likelihood of persecution or torture upon return. The available record does not detail how ICE is processing such claims for this group. DHS stated deportees receive notice and assurances, but did not specify whether guarantees extend to treatment in Afghanistan after leaving ICE custody. Affected individuals should seek emergency legal counsel immediately.
What did the 66 members of Congress request regarding Afghan deportations?
Sixty-six members of Congress sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin calling for the cancellation of deportation flights of Afghans and Iranians. The available record does not detail the specific legal arguments made in the letter or whether it carries any binding legal effect; congressional letters of this type are political communications and do not independently halt executive enforcement actions.
Who is responsible for deported Afghans after they leave ICE custody in Pakistan?
This is a critical unresolved question. A DHS spokesperson stated, "When an individual is no longer in ICE custody, ICE is no longer responsible for them." DHS did not specify which government would oversee transportation from Pakistan to Afghanistan or what protections would apply during that transit. The Pakistani embassy did not respond to press inquiries, and the Taliban Foreign Ministry called for coordination and respect for Afghan citizens' rights and dignity.