A federal judge has issued an order that halts deportations from the United States to South Sudan, stirring concerns over its impact on U.S. diplomatic efforts.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has argued that the court's decision disrupts U.S. relations with several countries and challenges the president's constitutional powers, as Fox News reports, with the administration now set to fight back.

The judicial decision, delivered by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, has disrupted deportations not only to South Sudan but also to other third-party nations.

The Trump administration quickly responded by filing documents late on Friday contesting the order. The administration claims it undermines the president’s authority to effectively conduct foreign policy, as granted under Article II of the Constitution.

Impact on diplomatic efforts feared

Rubio addressed the potential repercussions of the court's decision in a public statement on Friday. According to him, this ruling does not merely interfere with domestic policy but also has wider implications for U.S. diplomacy. Specifically, he noted the complications arising in the U.S.’s dealings with Libya, South Sudan, and Djibouti.

The deportation flight in question was carrying individuals from various countries, including Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, Cuba, Mexico, and notably, South Sudan.

Currently, these individuals are housed temporarily at a U.S. Naval base situated in Djibouti. The administration has filed appeals emphasizing the pressure the court order places on presidential powers and the complications arising from detaining potentially dangerous individuals in a volatile region.

The administration insists that the decision has already harmed diplomatic efforts, with Rubio stating it "interfered with quiet diplomatic efforts" and has "exacerbated internal political and security divisions" in Libya.

This strain is not limited to Libya, as the consequences also resonate through relations with South Sudan and Djibouti.

Diplomatic challenges emerge in South Sudan, Djibouti

South Sudan initially refused to accept one of its nationals, complicating the deportation process. However, recent developments indicate more cooperation with the U.S. authorities. In an effort to motivate compliance, Secretary Rubio announced in April that visas for South Sudanese passport holders in the U.S. would be revoked if deportations were not facilitated.

The administration's filing cited severe impacts in Djibouti, a nation critical to U.S. operations in the Horn of Africa. The administration contends that detaining deportees in this sensitive location without certainty about their future release adds to the challenges facing U.S. foreign policy.

It is believed that this complex scenario presents an obstacle to smooth diplomatic relations in the region. Moreover, the misinformation and unexpected constraints imposed on presidential authority hinder an organized response from the U.S. government.

Legal, domestic implications closely watched

This case developed against a backdrop of an injunction issued in April, which had provisionally permitted deportees to challenge their removal orders. The initial court decision was intended to allow individuals a window to express fears of returning to their countries or being sent to third-party nations.

According to the administration’s filing, it was claimed that these individuals have not utilized this period to express valid fears about removal, specifically to South Sudan. This absence of action complicates the legal landscape further for the involved parties.

Rubio deemed the overall impact of the court order as "significant and irreparable" for U.S. foreign objectives. Furthermore, a justice department official emphasized the need for "judicial intervention" to reinstate full presidential power for conducting foreign policy effectively.

Seeking to ensure diplomatic success

The administration also mentioned potential disruptions to ongoing diplomatic work intended to rebuild constructive relationships, particularly with the South Sudanese capital, Juba. Rubio warned that the judicial stance might derail these quiet but crucial efforts.

The concern extends beyond individual deportations to the broader implications for international collaboration. For instance, specific extradition agreements with countries such as El Salvador might become strained if judicial decisions obstruct executive functions.

Amid these complexities, the Trump administration remains committed to ensuring that presidential powers under Article II are recognized and restored by the judicial system. As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes for U.S. foreign policy and domestic law remain considerable.