ICE and Iran worked together to deport Iranians from U.S., newly released emails show

The three flights were organized removals involving the United States and Iran. Their importance comes from the unusually clear record of how the process worked. Hundreds of emails obtained by the National Iranian American Council describe cooperation between officials from both countries.

The flights occurred in September 2025, December 2025, and January 2026. Together, they carried more than 100 Iranians back to Iran. The key mechanism was government coordination: U.S. immigration officials and Iranian authorities communicated to arrange transportation and returns.

The emails provide the most transparent play-by-play yet of this cooperation, according to the article. They show that deportation was not simply a one-sided U.S. action. It required practical coordination with Iran. The article does not provide a detailed breakdown of each flight or explain every passenger’s case. It does show that cross-border cooperation made these three removals possible.

ICE, or U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is part of the Department of Homeland Security. It enforces federal immigration laws. Its duties include identifying some people for removal, detaining people in immigration proceedings, managing cases, and carrying out deportations. Other immigration officials work in agencies such as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the immigration courts.

In a removal case, officials may investigate a person’s immigration status, issue or pursue a removal case, and seek a final order from an immigration judge. After that order becomes final, ICE generally handles enforcement and departure arrangements. Those steps can include detention, obtaining travel documents, and coordinating transportation with another country.

The article focuses on emails involving U.S. immigration officials and Iranian authorities. It does not identify every U.S. agency or employee involved. In general, the system divides responsibilities among enforcement, benefits processing, and adjudication. Together, these roles determine whether someone can remain and how a removal occurs.

The reported scale was more than 100 Iranian people returned to Iran. This number covers all three immigration flights described in the article. The figure matters because it shows a coordinated operation involving many passengers, rather than an isolated removal.

The flights occurred over several months. One took place in September 2025, another in December 2025, and the third in January 2026. The article says the passengers were flown back to Iran on these separate immigration flights. It does not give an exact total beyond saying more than 100.

The timeline also shows continuing coordination across two calendar years. U.S. immigration officials and Iranian authorities worked together during that period to arrange the returns. The article does not provide a flight-by-flight passenger count. Therefore, the most precise supported summary is more than 100 people across three flights from September 2025 through January 2026.

Iranian authorities were cooperating partners in the deportation process. The article says the United States and Iran worked together to arrange flights carrying more than 100 Iranians back to Iran. That role matters because removals usually require coordination beyond the U.S. government.

The concrete evidence is the email exchange obtained by the National Iranian American Council. The messages offer a play-by-play of officials working across borders around three flights. Iranian involvement therefore went beyond simply hearing about a U.S. decision. The authorities helped coordinate the return and receive people in Iran, although the article does not specify every Iranian office involved.

This cooperation was tied to flights in September and December 2025 and January 2026. The emails make the process more visible, but they do not provide a complete account of each person’s case. Their broader significance is practical: deportations can depend on communication and acceptance by the destination country.

Deportation crosses national borders, so the United States cannot control the other country’s territory. A receiving country generally must recognize the person, provide or accept travel documents, and permit entry. Without that cooperation, officials may struggle to complete the removal even when a U.S. order exists.

For example, the article describes U.S. and Iranian officials working together on three flights. That coordination likely covered the practical arrangements needed for people to travel and be received. The source confirms cooperation, but it does not list every document, approval, or communication used. In general, these details are essential to a lawful, workable transfer.

This requirement can make removals slow or difficult when governments disagree or do not respond. In the Iran case, cooperation allowed more than 100 people to be flown back between September 2025 and January 2026. The broader lesson is that immigration enforcement depends partly on diplomatic and logistical relationships with destination countries.

A final order of removal means the U.S. government has a legally enforceable decision requiring a person to leave. It usually follows immigration-court proceedings and any available appeals or reviews. The order changes the case from a pending question about status into an enforcement matter.

ICE may detain the person and arrange departure to the designated country. Officials can need travel documents, transportation, and cooperation from that country. The article illustrates this practical step: U.S. officials coordinated with Iranian authorities for three flights carrying more than 100 people. A final order alone does not physically move someone across a border.

The person may ultimately be deported, though timing can vary. Some cases involve delays, legal motions, or difficulty obtaining documents. A person may also seek certain forms of relief or a stay before removal. The article does not describe individual outcomes, so these are general features of the U.S. immigration system rather than facts about every passenger.

A person who cannot otherwise remain lawfully may still have legal options. Depending on the facts, an immigration judge or another agency may grant asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture. Some people may also qualify for adjustment of status or another immigration benefit. Eligibility depends on the person’s circumstances and evidence.

Other outcomes can include voluntary departure, which allows someone to leave on an agreed schedule, or a temporary stay while a motion, appeal, or other request is considered. Humanitarian programs, parole, or deferred action may also affect enforcement in particular cases. These options are not automatic and do not apply to everyone.

The source article focuses on coordinated removals to Iran, not on alternatives in individual cases. Its emails show that more than 100 people were flown back on three flights. More broadly, the U.S. system can produce different results after a removal case begins. A final order, legal protection, or administrative decision may change what happens next.