The Ghana deportees lawsuit is actually three overlapping legal actions arising from a 2025 agreement under which Ghana accepted West African nationals removed from the United States: a habeas-style petition brought by the detained deportees themselves in Ghana, a federal case called D.A. v. Noem filed in Washington, D.C., and a constitutional challenge filed by the Ghanaian civil society group Democracy Hub in the Supreme Court of Ghana. None has yet produced a merits ruling striking down the arrangement, and the deportations have continued.
The Agreement Being Challenged
In mid-2025, Ghana and the United States signed what Ghanaian officials called a Memorandum of Understanding on Repatriation and Temporary Hosting of West African Nationals.1Jurist. Explainer: Does Ghana’s Deportation Deal With the US Breach Constitutional Procedure Under its terms, Ghana agreed to receive and temporarily host West African deportees from the U.S., including people who were not Ghanaian citizens. President John Mahama defended the deal by pointing to the ECOWAS free-movement protocol, which lets West African nationals enter Ghana without visas.2BBC. Ghana Agrees to Accept West African Deportees From US
Foreign Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa called the arrangement grounded in “humanitarian principles and pan-African solidarity” and denied that money changed hands. He also acknowledged on Ghanaian television that U.S. officials had linked the deal to American concessions Ghana was seeking, including reversal of visa restrictions, extension of a trade deal, and reconsideration of a 15 percent tariff.3Courthouse News Service. Lawsuit Filed to Void Ghana-US Deportation Deal The agreement was never submitted to Ghana’s Parliament; the government maintained that an MoU, unlike a treaty, did not require ratification.1Jurist. Explainer: Does Ghana’s Deportation Deal With the US Breach Constitutional Procedure That decision is the heart of the constitutional case now before Ghana’s Supreme Court.
What Happened to the Deportees
On September 5, 2025, 14 people were removed from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody and flown to Ghana on a military cargo plane.4New York Times. US Deportees Sue Ghana The group was 13 Nigerian nationals and one Gambian; none were Ghanaian.5PBS NewsHour. More African Nations Are Receiving Third-Country Immigrants Deported by the US According to the federal lawsuit that followed, four of five plaintiffs were restrained in straitjackets for roughly 16 hours during the flight and given only bread and water.6Jurist. West African Migrants Allegedly Held in Straitjackets During US Deportation to Ghana
Three were reportedly deported onward the same night. The remaining 11 were taken to the Bundase Military Training Camp, a facility about 70 kilometers from Accra ordinarily used for military exercises and peacekeeping training.7DW. Ghana Faces Growing Criticism Over US Deportee Agreement8RFI. West Africans Deported by US Sue Ghana for Unlawful Detention Detainees described the conditions as “terrible,” reporting malaria, contaminated water, inadequate food, no reliable electricity or running water, and limited ability to contact family or lawyers.9Global Detention Project. Bundase Training Camp10Third Country Deportation Watch. Ghana The Ghana Armed Forces initially said they “have no idea about the issue” and were not holding anyone, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said all deportees had been repatriated. Lawyers and detainees contradicted both statements.
The Deportees’ Habeas Petition in Ghana
Eleven of the detained men filed a habeas corpus-style application in Ghanaian courts, represented by lawyer Oliver Barker-Vormawor. They asked the government to produce them before a court and justify their imprisonment, arguing that none had been charged with violating any Ghanaian law.11BBC. Deportees Held in Ghana Military Camp File Lawsuit
The case never reached a merits ruling. Barker-Vormawor said the government rendered the suit “irrelevant” by deporting most of the men to their home countries while proceedings were pending. Six were sent to Togo and one was released to a relative in Ghana. Eight of the men had claimed they could not legally be returned to their home countries because they faced torture, persecution, or inhumane treatment.12The Guardian. West Africans Deported by the US Were Denied Their Rights, Says Lawyer
D.A. v. Noem in US Federal Court
Five deportees, three Nigerians and two Gambians, also sued the U.S. government. The case, D.A. v. Noem, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Asian Americans Advancing Justice on the plaintiffs’ behalf.13Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. D.A. v. Noem All five had previously been granted fear-based immigration relief by U.S. judges, meaning courts had already found they faced persecution or torture if returned to their home countries. The complaint alleged the Trump administration sent them to Ghana precisely to sidestep those protections, and that an ICE officer told the plaintiffs during the flight they would be moved onward to their home countries after landing.14Asian Americans Advancing Justice. Lawsuit Says US Deported Migrants to Ghana to Sidestep Restrictions
On September 15, 2025, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issued a 16-page order declining to grant the emergency injunction the plaintiffs sought. Because the migrants were in Ghanaian government custody, she wrote, the court could not “order the U.S. government to order a foreign government to take any action.”15Washington Post. Trump Ghana Immigration Deportations Chutkan She also cited a June 2025 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the administration to continue third-country deportations while separate Boston-based litigation proceeded.16Reuters. US Judge Blasts Trump Deportations to Ghana, Says She Lacks Jurisdiction to Hear Suit
Her language was not sympathetic to the government. Judge Chutkan described the deportations as a “pattern and widespread effort to evade the government’s legal obligations by doing indirectly what it cannot do directly” and called the administration’s posture toward the migrants’ safety “cavalier.”15Washington Post. Trump Ghana Immigration Deportations Chutkan She noted that despite Ghana’s diplomatic assurances, one plaintiff had already been sent on to Gambia and was in hiding.16Reuters. US Judge Blasts Trump Deportations to Ghana, Says She Lacks Jurisdiction to Hear Suit Another plaintiff had submitted a sworn statement alleging he had been beaten and tortured by Nigerian security forces, who threatened to kill him if he returned.17New York Times. Judge Rules on Migrants Deported to Ghana
By January 2026, reporting confirmed that of 30 noncitizens deported from the U.S. to Ghana in 2025, at least 22 had been sent onward by Ghana to their home countries, despite U.S. court orders barring their direct return.18Immigration Policy Tracking. Reported Trump Administration Enters Agreement With Ghana for Third-Country Removals
Democracy Hub’s Supreme Court Challenge
On October 13, 2025, Democracy Hub, a Ghanaian pressure group led by Barker-Vormawor, filed a petition with the Supreme Court of Ghana attacking the legality of the entire deportation arrangement. The petition names the Attorney General and the Minister for Foreign Affairs as defendants.19Modern Ghana. Democracy Hub Drags Government to Supreme Court
The core argument rests on Article 75(2) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, which requires parliamentary ratification for international agreements that create legal obligations. Democracy Hub contends the MoU plainly imposes such obligations by committing Ghana to receive, host, and resettle deportees, and that President Mahama acted unconstitutionally by implementing it without parliamentary approval.1Jurist. Explainer: Does Ghana’s Deportation Deal With the US Breach Constitutional Procedure The petition also alleges violations of the Refugee Convention and the Convention Against Torture, arguing the arrangement breaches the principle of non-refoulement by moving people toward places where they risk persecution.19Modern Ghana. Democracy Hub Drags Government to Supreme Court
The petition alleges at least 42 individuals were brought to Ghana in three batches, on September 6, September 19, and October 13, 2025, and were held in inhumane conditions at Bundase. It seeks 28 forms of relief, including a declaration that the MoU is unconstitutional and void, an injunction halting further deportations, and an order barring the government from detaining civilians in military facilities.19Modern Ghana. Democracy Hub Drags Government to Supreme Court
Democracy Hub also sought an interlocutory injunction to suspend the agreement while the case was decided. A hearing on that application was scheduled for October 22, 2025, but was adjourned after the Attorney General’s office failed to respond in time. A further hearing was set for November 12, 2025.1Jurist. Explainer: Does Ghana’s Deportation Deal With the US Breach Constitutional Procedure Government spokesperson Felix Kwakye Ofosu said the Attorney General would defend the arrangement.20Politico. Ghana Rights Group Challenges Deportations From Trump Administration
Two prior Supreme Court rulings cut in Democracy Hub’s favor. In Margaret Banful and Henry Nana Boakye v. The Attorney General (2017), the court held that a “Note Verbal” exchanged between Ghana and the U.S. was an agreement under Article 75 requiring parliamentary ratification. In Yaw Brogya Gyamfi v. The Attorney General (2020), the court reached the same conclusion about a defence cooperation agreement between the two countries.1Jurist. Explainer: Does Ghana’s Deportation Deal With the US Breach Constitutional Procedure Both precedents suggest that labelling an instrument an MoU does not exempt it from ratification if it creates binding obligations.
The UN Committee Against Torture Request
On September 22, 2025, the United Nations Committee Against Torture sent Ghana a letter asking it to refrain from deporting any of the transferred migrants while the committee considered a complaint filed on their behalf under the Convention Against Torture. Both the United States and Ghana are signatories. Patrick Taurel, a member of the migrants’ legal team, provided the letter to the press.21New York Times. Migrants Ghana Deportations Ghana did not publicly comply; most deportees were later sent to their home countries.18Immigration Policy Tracking. Reported Trump Administration Enters Agreement With Ghana for Third-Country Removals
How the Broader US Litigation Affects These Cases
The Ghana transfers are part of a wider Trump administration policy of removing migrants to countries other than their own. The legality of that policy is being fought separately in D.V.D. v. Department of Homeland Security, filed in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts. In April 2025, the Massachusetts judge barred the administration from conducting third-country removals without first giving deportees a meaningful chance to raise claims of persecution or torture. In June 2025, the Supreme Court stayed that injunction, allowing deportations to continue during the appeal. On February 25, 2026, the Massachusetts court declared the policy unlawful and set it aside, ruling that the government cannot deport people to third countries without meaningful notice and a genuine chance to seek protection. The administration appealed, and that ruling is stayed.10Third Country Deportation Watch. Ghana In March 2026, the First Circuit voted 2-1 to pause the lower court’s ruling, allowing the deportations to continue while the litigation proceeds.22New York Times. Trump Deportations Appeals Ruling
That litigation matters directly to the Ghana cases. Judge Chutkan cited the Supreme Court’s June 2025 stay as a reason she could not intervene for the Ghana deportees. If the policy is ultimately struck down on appeal, it could retroactively undercut the legal basis for the Ghana transfers.
Where Things Stand
As of mid-2026, the Supreme Court of Ghana has not issued a final ruling on Democracy Hub’s constitutional challenge. The deportees’ habeas petition in Ghana became moot after the government deported most of the detainees. D.A. v. Noem stalled in Washington following Judge Chutkan’s jurisdictional ruling. The broader challenge to third-country deportations remains on appeal before the First Circuit, the policy continues under a Supreme Court stay, and Ghana remains one of several African nations accepting deportees under bilateral arrangements with Washington.