The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration may resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own while the justices consider whether the policy is lawful.

In a brief, unsigned 6-3 order, the court suspended a ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy that had blocked the Department of Homeland Security’s third-country deportation policy. The justices offered no explanation for the decision but agreed to hear full arguments in December.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche celebrated the ruling in a post on X, describing it as confirmation of the administration’s legal stance.

“Now for the second time, SCOTUS just granted our stay in conducting all third-country removals of illegal aliens,” Blanche wrote. “Again, this is entirely lawful and a critical tool for immigration enforcement. Unlike the lower court, SCOTUS waited to hear from both sides before making the decision.”

The policy allows U.S. officials to deport migrants to so-called “third countries”—nations that did not appear on their original removal orders. The administration has turned to the approach because many migrants’ home countries refuse to accept them. Under the policy, officials consider assurances to Secretary of State Marco Rubio that deportees will not face persecution or torture sufficient to permit the transfer.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE: Ewan McGregor shares the movie he dislikes the most – NewsFinale

Solicitor General John Sauer told the justices that third-country removals are an important tool for deporting some of the most serious criminal offenders. He also said the lower court’s order forced DHS to cancel a flight carrying 70 deportees to three countries. Rubio’s State Department has reached agreements with as many as 31 nations, primarily in Africa and Latin America, with at least $410 million pledged through the end of June.

The legal challenge began earlier this year. In February, Murphy, a Biden-appointed judge, ruled that the policy violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections because migrants received neither adequate notice nor a meaningful opportunity to express fears of torture. The First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of that ruling on Sept. 18. Tuesday’s action marked the administration’s second Supreme Court stay in the case.

The court’s three liberal justices—Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson—dissented. Trina Realmuto, an attorney representing the migrants, said the decision leaves people vulnerable to immediate deportation to countries where they could face persecution before they have a chance to present their claims.

Also Tuesday, Burundi announced that it would accept deportees from the United States who have no ties to the East African nation. A spokesperson for the country’s president said the arrangement would apply only to people who are not facing prosecution and have no connections to terrorism.

Human rights groups estimate that more than 25,000 migrants have been deported to 29 countries under the policy, with most sent to Mexico. The Supreme Court is not expected to issue a final ruling until the summer of 2027.

Off-duty emergency workers rushed to help save the life of a devoted mother who died in a motorway crash, leaving behind her three young children.

Jo Law, 31, was involved in the fatal collision while travelling along the M4 near Windsor on September 9.

Her family later learned that several off-duty emergency service workers were caught in the traffic and immediately stopped to help the mother-of-three.

Despite their efforts to save her, Ms Law, who had been travelling alone, died at the scene.

Ms Law’s aunt, Samantha Neal, said: “Words cannot truly express how grateful we are to know that, in those moments, there were people there with her who stepped forward to help, care for her and do everything they possibly could.

“To every person who stopped, helped, offered their skills or simply stayed with Jo – from the bottom of our hearts, thank you.”

She said knowing Ms Law was “surrounded by people who cared and tried so hard to help her” had brought the family an “incredible amount of comfort” during an otherwise heartbreaking time.

Ms Neal described the stay-at-home mother as “devoted” to her children: Harvie, 12, Isla, nine, and Parker, four.

Paying tribute to her niece, she said: “Everything she did was about them and teaching them about the ways of the world.

“They used to go out on motorbikes and do dirt biking. They spent a lot of time outdoors.

“She was a good mother and quite laid-back. She loved spending time with her very large family.

YOU MAY ALSO READ: Ohio Cancer Patient Sues Hospital Over Alleged Wrong-Leg Amputation

“She was quite silly as a niece, too. She loved messing around and making TikToks with her children, doing silly dances.”

Ms Neal said the family had been devastated by Ms Law’s death, although the tragedy had brought relatives even closer together.

She explained: “We’re a big family and we live a road apart; I think this has just brought everyone closer. We went on a family holiday to Ibiza in August, so it was nice to have had that before this happened.”

Following the crash, the family launched a GoFundMe appeal with an initial target of £7,000. The fundraiser has since surpassed that goal, with more than £17,000 raised.

The money will help pay for Ms Law’s funeral, while any remaining funds will be put aside for her children, who are now living with their father full-time.

Her funeral is due to take place in mid-October.

Ms Neal said: “Jo was a loving mum to three beautiful children. They were her world, and they now have to face life without their mum far too soon.

‘As a family, we are trying to come to terms with the unimaginable pain of losing Jo while also facing the financial costs that come with such a sudden and heartbreaking loss.

‘We would like to raise funds to help towards Jo’s funeral and give her children some financial support as they begin to navigate the difficult road ahead without their mum.

‘Any contribution, no matter how big or small, would mean more to Jo’s family and children than words can express.’

She added that Ms Law was ‘loved by so many and will never be forgotten’ and her  children will ‘always know just how deeply their mum was loved and how many people cared about her’.

Ms Law was born in Gravesend, Kent, and lived in Swanley her whole life.

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s plan to shield coastal homes from a potential super El Niño is facing criticism from experts who warn it could destroy some of the state’s most treasured beaches.

As California’s shoreline braces for monster waves linked to El Niño, residents and officials are turning to boulders, seawalls and other barriers to defend homes from the ocean.

A statement issued by the governor’s office last week said the state would be permitted to “move faster to protect communities, stage critical resources, and strengthen readiness before severe weather intensifies.”

Since then, sections of the coast have been reinforced with artificial defenses made from rocks, concrete, wood and seawalls designed to hold back the water.

Experts, however, caution that these measures may offer only temporary relief. In the longer term, they could damage sandy beaches and create effects that remain along the coast well beyond the current storm season.

Jonathan Warrick of the US Geological Survey told the LA Times: “It’s kind of a double-edged sword, where it may have some short-term benefits, but long-term, there’s a lot of work showing that some of those protection measures can have negative effects – both at the site, and immediately adjacent to the site.”

The conflict between protecting communities from rising seas today and preventing damage to the coastline tomorrow is becoming an increasingly urgent concern.

In Dana Point, south of the upscale surf town of Laguna Beach, coastal homeowners have moved quickly to install defenses such as a boulder barrier, according to a statement from the city.

KTLA-TV recently aired footage showing workers pouring concrete along the shoreline to protect beach homes.

Homes are not the only structures at risk. A coastal railroad line that transports $1 billion in freight each year has also long faced the threat of falling into the ocean.

A riprap project installed last year was intended to slow soil erosion and absorb the force of crashing waves. But this month, the project was seen losing sediment near the train tracks, which fell into the ocean.

The emergency defenses may preserve buildings and infrastructure in the short term, but they are also helping drive the loss of California’s sandy shoreline, leaving beaches trapped between a rising ocean and rigid seawalls.

Chad Nelsen, chief executive of the coastal and ocean conservation organization Surfrider Foundation, warned that seawalls and other fixed barriers leave beaches with no room for sand to shift.

“Sea walls and revetments and rock riprap can temporarily protect homes and public infrastructure like the train tracks, but they ultimately destroy the beach,” Nelsen told the LA Times.

“We’re making a trade-off between protecting the property and infrastructure for the public’s beach.”

The US Geological Survey said in 2017 that California could lose as much as two-thirds of its beaches by the end of this century if sea levels rise by three to six feet.

EXPLORE MORE: Diddy Receives Earliest Release Date Yet in Federal Prison Sentence Update

The coastal city of Pacifica, near San Francisco, already lost a beach that existed in the 1970s to a mostly armored coastline.

A partial solution for some areas is to import sand to strengthen eroding beaches, but that can be very expensive.

Nelsen told the LA Times: ‘One of the questions is, if we’re going to spend state and federal money to replenish the beaches, is that fair that the homeowners get free public protection in front of their homes at all of our costs?

‘At some point, it’ll be probably cheaper to try to buy out the homes than to put sand on the beach forever, because these beach nourishment projects, beach replenishment projects, they’re tens of millions of dollars.’

Issues of coastal erosion, bluff movement, landslides, hight tides, storms and ocean swells have collectively disrupted a trainline from San Diego to Orange County for up to a full year in the past five years, according to the Orange County Transportation Authority.

The agency told the LA Times it has been working on solutions to protect the rail line for the next three decades, while a separate state-led effort looks at solutions beyond that time.

Some concepts include sand placement and, depending on location, more heavily engineered interventions such as seawalls or rock.

‘More than $300 million in state, federal and local funding has been secured for those priority rail protection efforts. Sand placement is also a significant component of this effort,’ the authority said.

Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley acknowledged that rocks aren’t the perfect solution, but they are often the only option for emergencies.

‘We know the rocks that they have to keep adding out there are exacerbating the sand erosion, but we have to do that to protect the rails,’ she told the LA Times.

Recent hits to beaches were a result of strong swells from hurricanes in the eastern Pacific Ocean, Warrick said, as well as abnormally high tides.

Another factors is the roughly one-foot increase in sea levels along the California coast over the last 125 years caused by human-made global warming.

The Daily Mail contacted Gavin Newsom’s office for comment.