The Trump administration’s reported consideration of sending illegal immigrants with criminal records to countries like Libya and Rwanda represents a bold, controversial escalation in its already aggressive immigration strategy — and one that is almost certain to ignite legal, ethical, and geopolitical firestorms.
According to CNN, administration officials are engaged in preliminary discussions with the governments of both nations, floating a plan that would relocate certain undocumented migrants — especially those with criminal histories — thousands of miles away to nations widely known for systemic human rights abuses and unstable political environments. The proposal is deeply rooted in a strategic philosophy articulated during a recent cabinet meeting: keep deportees as far from the U.S. border as possible to prevent re-entry.
Trump cracks down on illegal immigration, exploring deals to send criminal illegal immigrants to Rwanda and Libya. If getting sent to CECOT in El Salvador didn't scare you enough, try Libya and Rwanda. pic.twitter.com/gBGh6sCx1r
— DeVory Darkins (@devorydarkins) April 30, 2025
“We are actively searching for other countries to take people from third countries,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday, doubling down on a philosophy that prioritizes deterrence over humanitarian considerations. “And the further away from America, the better.”
But this strategy raises profound concerns. Libya and Rwanda, both of which have a grim record of prison abuses, are hardly considered safe harbors for deportees. Libya’s facilities are frequently described by international watchdogs as lawless torture zones, where migrants are at risk of beatings, starvation, and arbitrary detention by both the state and armed militias. Rwanda’s prisons, though under tighter government control, are plagued by overcrowding, lack of basic necessities, and reports of physical coercion.
The administration’s rationale may be couched in national security and immigration control, but the optics and implications are staggering. Sending migrants — even those with criminal records — into environments where torture and human rights violations are documented norms is not just politically explosive; it’s legally questionable under international asylum laws and U.S. obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention and its protocols.
🔴 Libya’s Sednaya Prison
Horrific videos were leaked on Sunday showing a group of guards torturing Libyans in Qarnada Prison in Eastern #Libya.
The Notorious Qarnada prison is known for holding political prisoners opposed to warlord Khalifa Haftar, backed by UAE and Egypt. pic.twitter.com/hzSGBiQDHl
— DOAM (@doamuslims) January 14, 2025
This strategy, if implemented, would likely hinge on bilateral agreements similar to “safe third country” pacts the administration previously tried to establish with Central American nations. But calling Libya a “safe” third country, given its state of lawlessness and internationally condemned detention practices, would be a stretch that even the most sympathetic legal courts might balk at.
More fundamentally, the proposed policy raises ethical questions about the U.S. outsourcing its immigration enforcement — and human consequences — to nations ill-equipped to guarantee basic rights. It effectively transforms deportation into a tool of punitive exile, potentially sending individuals into conditions that could violate protections against cruel and unusual punishment.