Judge orders Arizona man returned from Africa after 'unlawful' deportation

A federal judge’s order involving a Phoenix man could have major implications for Arizona attorneys and immigrant rights advocates challenging the government’s use of third country deportations. U.S. District Judge John C. Hinderaker has directed the Department of Homeland Security to take reasonable steps to bring Ahmed Soliman back to the United States from Equatorial Guinea, where he has been detained for more than five months. The ruling found that Soliman was sent there unlawfully, without notice or a chance to object, and that he has faced continuing and serious harm.

Soliman, 31, grew up in Phoenix after his family left Egypt and moved to Arizona when he was 4. ICE deported him to Equatorial Guinea on April 28, even though he had no connection to the Central African country. His attorneys say he was forced onto a plane without receiving the fear screening that allows a person to explain why they believe they would face persecution or torture in the destination country. The judge concluded that the removal violated federal law and Soliman’s constitutional right to due process.

The order describes a series of alleged abuses after Soliman arrived. He and other deportees were held at Hotel Bamy, a decommissioned hotel, under armed guard. According to accounts cited by the court, detainees faced beatings, threats involving firearms, and pressure to agree to return to their countries of origin. Hinderaker wrote that the evidence showed Soliman had been confined, assaulted, held at gunpoint, and later arrested, hooded, beaten, and held incommunicado, reportedly without food or water.

Soliman was arrested on Sept. 11, four days before his attorneys filed a civil complaint in federal court in Arizona. Lawyers said Equatorial Guinea authorities appeared to target him because he had spoken publicly about the conditions facing American deportees at the hotel. A video shared with the Arizona Daily Star showed Soliman on his knees inside the facility while an officer pointed a firearm at him. After he was hospitalized last month, his attorneys could not confirm his diagnosis or condition, and they later learned he had been returned to a jail cell without access to his legal counsel.

The case has been handled in part by the Tucson firm Green Evans-Schroeder. Senior attorney Dana Camilleri said the legal team reacted with relief when it read the judge’s ruling, after months of searching for a way to help Soliman. Attorney Jesse Evans-Schroeder said Soliman’s family in Arizona had been left waiting without confirmation that he was safe or even alive. Lawyers also credited public reporting about the detainees’ treatment with helping document what was happening in Equatorial Guinea. Hinderaker cited news reports, including the Daily Star’s coverage, in his decision.

The ruling requires DHS to provide the court with an update every three days. Those reports must address what the agency knows about Soliman’s location and physical condition, along with the actions officials have taken or plan to take to secure his release and return. DHS must pay for transportation, provide necessary travel documents, and arrange for Soliman to enter through a U.S. port. The agency has 30 days to appeal. DHS and ICE did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the order.

Even if Soliman returns, the case may not end there. Hinderaker barred DHS from sending him to another third country unless the government first gives him a meaningful chance to raise a fear claim before a neutral judge. That provision addresses a central dispute over the government’s practice of deporting people to countries with which they have no meaningful ties.

The United States has used a confidential agreement with Equatorial Guinea to accept deportees from other countries, reportedly providing the government there $7.5 million. The State Department has declined to release the agreement, and DHS attorneys previously did not provide it to Hinderaker in Soliman’s earlier habeas case, which challenged his detention at the Eloy Detention Center. That case was still pending when he was deported. DHS has argued that separate fear screenings are unnecessary when a receiving country gives diplomatic assurances that deportees will be safe, but courts have questioned whether those assurances offer adequate protection.

The broader legal dispute is continuing in a case known as DVD versus DHS. The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in September that deportees must receive meaningful notice and an opportunity for a fear screening, though the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that ruling after the government appealed. The justices are scheduled to hear the case in December. Hinderaker said he could still rule on Soliman’s claims because the alleged harm was ongoing and irreversible, and because much of the requested relief, including transportation and admission to the United States, remained within DHS control. For Arizona families and attorneys watching the government’s deportation practices, the order offers a direct test of whether officials can be held accountable after someone is sent beyond the country’s borders.