Court Denies Stay: Nigerian Woman Faces Removal to Ghana
Ifeoma Ojukwu had a court order protecting her from deportation to Nigeria — but in September 2026, ICE detained her and prepared to send her to Ghana instead. On October 9, 2026, the Sixth Circuit denied her emergency request to stop the removal, citing a Supreme Court decision that blocked similar relief in a nationwide class action challenging the same DHS third-country removal policy.
You have a withholding of removal order protecting you from deportation to your home country — and you think that means you are safe. Ifeoma Ada Chinweoke Ojukwu believed the same thing. She had lived in LaGrange, Ohio for years, married a U.S. citizen, raised U.S.-citizen children, and regularly reported to immigration authorities. Then, in September 2026, ICE detained her and announced plans to send her not to Nigeria — where she is legally protected — but to Ghana, a country she had no connection to.
What the Court Decided
On October 9, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied Ojukwu's emergency motion to stop her removal. The court found she had not shown a strong enough chance of winning her case. The key reason: the Supreme Court had already, in September 2026, stayed a nationwide injunction in a similar class action called DHS v. D.V.D. (No. 26-426). That case challenged the same DHS policy — a March 2025 directive allowing the government to remove people to third countries that have given diplomatic assurances they will not persecute or torture the person. The Supreme Court also agreed to hear the D.V.D. case and decide whether the policy is legal. Because Ojukwu's claims were the same as those in D.V.D., and because the Supreme Court had already blocked relief in that case, the Sixth Circuit said she had not met the high bar for emergency relief.
Immigration Deadlines 2026 — Free
Download PDF with all key dates
Why This Affects More Than One Person
Withholding of removal is country-specific. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A), the government cannot send you to a country where your life or freedom would be threatened. But that protection only covers the named country — not every country in the world. The DHS policy at issue uses a separate INA provision that allows removal to a third country when removal to the home country is not possible, as long as that country's government agrees to accept the person and provides assurances against persecution or torture. DHS says it does not need to give the individual a hearing before using this route. That is exactly what courts are now fighting over. The Supreme Court's decision in D.V.D. — expected in the coming term — will likely set the rule for thousands of people in similar situations across the country.
What to Do
- If you have withholding of removal or a similar protection, ask your immigration lawyer whether DHS has any third-country removal agreements that could affect you — do not assume your protection covers all destinations.
- Check whether you are a member of the D.V.D. class action. Your attorney can look up whether the certified class covers your situation, which may give you additional legal arguments.
- If ICE contacts you or asks you to report in person, bring an attorney or call one immediately before you go. Detention can happen at a routine check-in, as it did in Ojukwu's case.
- Follow the Supreme Court's D.V.D. ruling closely. If the Court rules that individuals must receive a hearing before third-country removal, that decision could directly apply to your case.
What to do, step by step — see our guide “Immigration Court Rulings”.
Fishkin Law Firm, New York
Withholding of removal protects you only from removal to the specific country named in your order — it does not bar removal to a third country. Under the DHS policy at issue, the government believes it can remove you to another country without a hearing, as long as that country has given diplomatic assurances. Until the Supreme Court rules in D.V.D., courts are split on whether that process is legal, and individuals have very limited time to challenge removal once detained. If you have a withholding order and are required to report to ICE, consult an immigration attorney before your appointment.
Frequently Asked Questions
I have withholding of removal to my home country. Can ICE still deport me somewhere else?
Yes, under current DHS policy. Withholding of removal only blocks deportation to the specific country named in your order. The government can still try to remove you to a third country that agrees to accept you, as long as that country provides assurances you will not be persecuted or tortured there. The Supreme Court is currently deciding whether this practice is legal.
What is the D.V.D. case and why does it matter?
DHS v. D.V.D. is a class action lawsuit challenging the DHS policy of removing people to third countries without giving them a hearing first. The Supreme Court agreed in September 2026 to hear the case. Its ruling will likely decide whether people with withholding of removal have the right to contest third-country removal before it happens.
Can I be detained at a routine ICE check-in?
Yes. Ojukwu was detained when she showed up for a scheduled in-person reporting appointment in September 2026. If you are required to report to ICE, bring an attorney or have one on call. Do not go alone if you have any open immigration issues.
What should I do if I am suddenly told I will be removed to a country I have no connection to?
Contact an immigration attorney immediately. You may be able to file an emergency motion to stop the removal while you challenge the decision in court. Time is extremely short — in Ojukwu's case, the government announced removal just days after her detention. Acting within hours, not days, can make a difference.