Certainly! Here’s a rephrased version:
—
In a significant legal development in the USA, a group of eight migrants currently in custody has experienced a setback in their last-ditch effort to evade deportation to South Sudan, a nation criticized globally for serious human rights violations.
On a recent Friday, Judge Brian Murphy of Boston dismissed the last-minute appeal, which had sparked considerable legal activity throughout the day. The appeal argued that the Trump administration’s relentless push to deport these individuals to South Sudan was “impermissibly punitive” and violated the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment.”
The U.S. Department of State has previously condemned South Sudan for “extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture, and other forms of inhumane treatment,” urging American citizens to avoid travel to a region engulfed in conflict.
Despite these concerns, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled twice in favor of the Trump administration’s authority to deport individuals to nations outside their homelands, with the latest decision released just the day prior.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the eight migrants—originating from countries such as Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan, and Vietnam—were scheduled to be deported by 7 PM Eastern Time on that Friday.
The late appeal was lodged Thursday night, shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling. The case was initially overseen by Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, D.C., who displayed some empathy towards the migrants’ plight. While he temporarily paused the deportation until 4:30 PM Eastern Time, he ultimately transferred the case back to Judge Murphy, who had previously prompted significant Supreme Court actions against the deportations.
Judge Murphy had earlier issued injunctions to prevent deportation to South Sudan, which led to a series of successful appeals by the Trump administration. The eight men have been in custody at a military base in Djibouti while awaiting their fate.
During the hearing, Judge Moss remarked that it might be reasonable for the deportees to demonstrate that the Trump administration intended to subject them to potential abuse. He expressed concern over the morality of sending individuals back to dangerous circumstances solely to convey a punitive message.
In contrast, lawyers representing the Trump administration argued that continued delays in deportation could damage diplomatic relations with countries willing to accept migrants.
Judge Murphy, having ruled against the recent appeal, cited the right of the deportees to contest their removal based on genuine safety concerns. The U.S. Supreme Court had first lifted an injunction on June 23, affirming its stance again on Thursday, subtly reprimanding Judge Murphy in the process.
The Trump administration has aggressively pursued expedited deportations as part of its broader strategy of mass removal, a hallmark of President Trump’s tenure. Critics contend that this approach undermines the human rights of undocumented individuals, including their fundamental right to due process.
Conversely, the administration has framed undocumented immigration as an “invasion,” presenting it as a national security crisis requiring robust action to eradicate individuals deemed “barbaric, violent criminal illegal aliens.” The spokesperson for Homeland Security asserted that these individuals would be in South Sudan by Independence Day.
—
This version maintains the core information while offering fresh context and phrasing.