A federal appeals court late Wednesday had to clarify for the Trump administration that its ruling last week barred them from deporting migrants to third countries, after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials were poised to deport a Peruvian man to the Central African Republic.

A three-judge panel for the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals last week sided with a lower court judge who had found the Trump administration violated the law in attempting to deport migrants to countries other than the one they are from, determining they have a right to meaningful opportunity to contest and raise concerns.

But after their victory, lawyers for the migrants had to return to court to block one of the deportations at issue in the case.

Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said ICE “plainly stated that they were treating the decision as if it wasn’t in effect.”

“We filed that in response to the fact that they were clearly moving forward with third country removals, notwithstanding the 1st Circuit’s order and opinion on Friday,” she told The Hill.

The Justice Department has since appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

In Friday’s ruling, the appeals court sided with U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, a jurist who has earned the ire of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) top lawyer.

Throughout the lower court proceedings, Murphy had determined ICE had “unquestionably” violated his order in seeking to deport migrants to South Sudan, a country for which none in the group had any ties.

In February, Murphy found the Trump administration’s third country deportation policy unlawful, saying it “is not fine, nor is it legal.”

On Friday, the appeals court agreed, finding the policy violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

“The Guidance conflicts with the statutory and regulatory provisions governing fear-of-torture claims insofar as it authorizes third-country removals without effective notice and a meaningful opportunity to assert such claims in connection with such removals. The Guidance is therefore unlawful under the APA [Administrative Procedure Act],” Judge Seth Aframe, a Biden appointee, wrote in the decision for the court.

James Percival, general counsel for DHS, wrote on social media after the decision was issued, arguing the ruling was not yet in effect.

“The third country deportation policy continues, as the First Circuit’s ruling is not currently in effect. If you claim fear in your home country, DHS has the right to send you elsewhere,” he said.

Percival has blasted Murphy for other rulings, accusing him of having “engaged in mutiny against the Supreme Court” in another case involving Temporary Protected Status for Ethiopia.

An email from a Justice Department attorney offered a more technical explanation: while the appeals court upheld Murphy’s ruling, it did not specifically lift their initial stay barring it from taking effect during trial.

“The First Circuit granted the government’s motion for a ‘stay pending appeal.’ An appeal does not conclude until the mandate issues under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41 returning the case to district court,” that attorney wrote.

It’s a confusing claim, as the day the ruling was issued the case was remanded back to Murphy’s court.

“They kind of refused to acknowledge that they lost in court, so they came up with this technical point, and then the First Circuit took that excuse out from under them,” Realmuto said.

An emergency filing from Realmuto Wednesday night was swiftly responded to by the court, who at 11:30 p.m. wrote that “consistent with this court’s September 18, 2026, Judgment, the March 16, 2026, stay pending appeal is dissolved.”

DHS did not directly respond to questions about whether it had ignored a court order but defended the practice of third country removals.

“Third country removals are an essential public safety tool that remove the most dangerous criminal illegal aliens from our streets. Additionally, if an illegal alien chooses to file a claim in court refusing to go to their home country, we are required by law to find a safe and secure nation for them to go to. The First Circuit’s sudden decision to prevent these removals, especially given DHS’s two previous victories in the Supreme Court, is as reckless as it is lawless,” the agency said in a statement.

Attorney General Todd Blanche earlier Thursday said they would appeal the First Circuit’s ruling.

“Without even allowing the government a chance to respond, and in the dark of night, a federal appeals court blocked us from conducting all third-country removals of illegal aliens, an entirely legal and invaluable tool to stem the tide of illegal immigration. We will immediately seek relief from the Supreme Court, which previously granted a stay in this very same case,” he wrote on X.