In a rare and strong ruling, a US federal court has ordered immigration authorities to help bring back an Indian national who was deported to India even though a court had clearly stopped his removal, IANS reported. The court said the deportation was unlawful and directly violated its authority.
US court orders return of Indian man wrongly deported
In a memorandum and order dated January 9, the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas said Francisco D’Costa was deported on December 20, 2025, more than three hours after the court had issued an order stopping his removal.
Earlier that morning, the court had taken charge of D’Costa’s habeas petition and clearly directed that the government “Shall Not remove or deport Petitioner from the United States” unless it first received permission from the court, according to the court documents reviewed by IANS.
Despite this, D’Costa was placed on a Turkish Airlines flight that left Houston at 2:55 pm the same day. The court noted that immigration authorities were aware of the order before the flight departed. According to a memo submitted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), officials from the US Attorney’s Office, ICE, and the detention facility all had notice of the stay.
The government argued that the deportation was a mistake. The court rejected that claim, saying intent did not change what had happened. “The intent behind Petitioner’s unlawful removal, while relevant to contempt, has no bearing on the lawfulness of the removal,” the court said.
What was D’Costa’s case?
Francisco D’Costa, an Indian citizen, has lived in the United States since 2009. In October 2025, an immigration judge allowed him voluntary departure. After hiring a lawyer, D’Costa filed a motion to reopen his case. In his court documents, he told the judge that conditions in India had changed and said he faced a risk of persecution because he had converted to Christianity, according to IANS, citing court records.
Under US federal rules, filing that motion automatically turned his voluntary departure into a final removal order. The immigration judge denied a request to pause the deportation, but had not yet ruled on D’Costa’s motion to reopen when he was removed from the US.
The district court said deporting him at that point could have taken away his legal right to continue his case. The judge said this raised serious due process concerns.
The government argued that helping D’Costa return was not necessary. It said the court did not have jurisdiction and claimed D’Costa could continue his case from outside the US.
The court rejected both arguments. It said bringing D’Costa back was necessary to ensure the case proceeds “as it would have been had he not been improperly removed.”
Citing a unanimous US Supreme Court decision, the court said facilitating a return to the United States is an appropriate remedy when a noncitizen is removed in violation of a court order. As a result, the court ordered the government to help D’Costa return to the US “as soon as possible.” Authorities were also directed to submit a plan within five days explaining how they will carry out the return.