For ads-free news, click here.
From Fox News: The Supreme Court installed a tighter timeline for removable migrants to challenge their deportations as part of its decision on Thursday in a case involving a Jamaican immigrant who had tried to avoid being sent back to his home country.
The Supreme Court found that once migrants receive a final order of removal, a 30-day window for them to seek review of that order is triggered.
The ruling was roughly 5-4, with the three liberal justices dissenting and Justice Neil Gorsuch joining most of the dissent.
Pierre Riley, the Jamaican national at the center of the case, had followed the law and challenged his final removal order in the immigration court system. But when he attempted to seek review from the appellate court of the immigration court findings, the appellate court said its hands were tied because it had been more than a year since Riley had received his initial removal orders.
Riley invoked the “Convention Against Torture” rule to contest his deportation to Jamaica, citing the risk of torture due to a drug kingpin’s threat and arguing that returning would endanger his life.
He overstayed a visa decades ago, and was deported in 2021 after serving time for drug felonies.
The chain of events that ensued showcases how migrants facing removal can end up going down a windy due process road in the immigration and federal courts.
Grok gives this summary of Riley vs Bondi
Summary:
In Riley v. Bondi, the Supreme Court held that a Final Administrative Removal Order (FARO) issued by the Department of Homeland Security on January 26, 2021, constituted the "final order of removal" for Pierre Riley, triggering…— $8 Bartemy (@BartemyS) June 26, 2025
READ MORE AT Fox News.
