PANAMA

In February 2025, the United States transferred around 300 migrants and asylum seekers to Panama. Many had tried to seek asylum in the United States but were detained and expelled without a protection screening under the authority of President Trump’s January 20, 2025 Proclamation that suspended asylum access at the border. The group included people from Afghanistan, Cameroon, China, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Iran, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, and Uzbekistan. Human Rights First, Refugees International, and Human Rights Watch have documented numerous cases of asylum seekers expelled to Panama under the Proclamation without a screening on their claims despite expressing fear of return, including those fleeing political persecution, religious persecution, and anti-LGBTQ attacks.

After forcible transfer to Panama, people were subjected to indefinite and arbitrary detention without a legal basis, inhumane conditions of confinement, and the denial of access to counsel and ability to communicate with family. A woman from Iran wrote “Help” in lipstick on the window of a hotel in Panama City where the migrants were initially held incommunicado after their transfer from the United States. Another migrant held up a napkin with the words “Help us” written on it. At least one asylum seeker attempted suicide during this period. Within a week of the initial transfer, 170 people had been returned to their home countries. This raises serious concerns about chain refoulement. 

Those who resisted deportation were transferred to a remote jungle camp, where many reported terrible conditions—including extreme heat, non-potable water, rotten and insufficient food, lack of privacy, unsanitary conditions, and denial of phone access. People remained detained there for nearly a month. Under mounting pressure from litigation and international advocacy, Panama eventually released individuals with temporary permits that made no mention of access to asylum in Panama. Today, many of those remaining in Panama lack permanent status and some have not received permission to work legally.

These transfers took place under an expanded prior memorandum of understanding between the United States and Panama. Under the original agreement with Panama from July 2024, the United States supported Panama’s efforts to deport migrants moving northward who had reached Panamanian territory by funding 60 flights from Panama to primarily Ecuador and Colombia. As of May 2025, the U.S. government had paid Panama $14 million for the flights. Under the February 2025 expansion of the agreement, Panama agreed to serve as a “bridge” country: third country migrants and asylum seekers transferred from the United States would be received in Panama and subsequently returned to their home countries. According to Panamanian officials, the United States financed the migrants’ stay in Panama and paid for their deportation. In the weeks leading up to the transfers, the Trump administration made economic and diplomatic threats that the United States might seek to assert greater control over the Panama Canal. 

The forced transfers have been challenged in the United States and internationally for violating U.S. law and international human rights and refugee law. In July 2025, in RAICES v. Noem, a U.S. federal district court vacated as unlawful the January 20, 2025 Proclamation that suspended access to asylum at the border and under which authority the United States conducted many of the expulsions. The government appealed, and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia partially stayed the decision pending appeal. As a result, the U.S. government is barred from expelling  asylum seekers without a screening for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court has not yet ruled on relief for people already illegally expelled to third countries under the Proclamation, although the litigation is ongoing. 

Attorneys also filed a lawsuit against the government of Panama before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) on behalf of people detained at the jungle camp, arguing violations of international law including the right to be free from arbitrary detention and the right to seek asylum. The migrants’ detention was also challenged in a Panamanian court.