Federal Judge Orders Return of Deported Teen Asylum Seeker

A federal judge has found the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in contempt for deporting a teenage asylum seeker from El Salvador, against multiple court orders. The judge directed the U.S. government to bring him back to the country to pursue his asylum claim.

Stephanie A. Gallagher, the judge handling the case, highlighted that the deportation violated previous court orders issued on November 25, 2024, April 23, 2025, and July 29, 2026. These orders provided protections for E.L.A., a teenager identified as part of a settlement involving asylum seekers who had entered the U.S. as unaccompanied minors.

Enforcing Compliance

The contempt ruling stresses compliance with the court’s previous orders. It requires E.L.A.’s return to the U.S. to remedy the effects of his removal. A DHS spokesperson previously stated that E.L.A. had requested to depart voluntarily. Although E.L.A. illegally entered the U.S. in 2023, his deportation on March 13, 2026, and subsequent return before early August were marred by confusion.

The Deportation Controversy

This ruling follows concerns over how E.L.A. was removed, despite existing legal safeguards. Judge Gallagher questioned the government about the discrepancy, asking who was responsible for the deportation and whether the correct procedures were observed.

The court order demands that E.L.A. be allowed back into the U.S. Moreover, it prohibits officials from executing any final deportation order against him until his asylum application is processed or the settlement agreement expires. The government also has to notify E.L.A., his lawyers, and related parties about his planned return and must return any personal belongings and documents taken during his deportation.

Class Action Lawsuit Consequences

The problem traces back to J.O.P. v. DHS, a class action lawsuit that challenged policies affecting asylum seekers entering the U.S. as unaccompanied children. Judge Gallagher approved a settlement in November 2024, aimed at protecting eligible class members during their asylum claims.

To enforce this, the court issued subsequent orders to ensure class members weren’t prematurely removed before their cases were adjudicated. A pivotal July 2026 order mandated that ICE refrain from ejecting class members until their situation was clarified. ICE had to maintain alerts and reviews to prevent unwarranted removals.

After the March 2026 removal of E.L.A., the government confirmed he was a class member. Consequently, he was brought back on August 7 to continue his asylum application process. His temporary detention in Louisiana was part of this process when he faced a second removal.

Settlement Agreement Breach

The breach of the agreement was uncovered when a scheduled video call with E.L.A. was canceled, signaling his absence from the detention center. Later, family members informed his attorneys he had contacted them from El Salvador. This violated the settlement and court orders.

The government acknowledged the deportation and attributed it to “communication errors.” Friday’s order represents a significant development in the case, compelling the government to rectify the situation and prevent future occurrences.

The court requires updates by October 2 on E.L.A.’s return status, including his consent and return plans. Additionally, a memorandum outlining the court’s reasoning is under seal, with a public version pending proposed redactions.