Eight Palestinians living in the United States have been deported to the occupied West Bank — not on a government aircraft, but on a private jet owned by an Israeli-American businessman who is a real estate investment partner of President Donald Trump. The arrangement, described by sources cited by Haaretz as “highly unusual,” raises urgent questions about the entanglement of private financial interests and US immigration enforcement.

The deportees, whose identities have not been disclosed, were transferred by US law enforcement to Israel’s Prison Service prisoner escort unit. They were then transported by vehicle — accompanied by a representative from the Israeli Foreign Ministry — to a checkpoint near the illegal settlement of Modi’in Illit, and handed over to a Civil Administration official before being released into the West Bank.

Haaretz reported the private jet was “apparently chartered specifically” by American officials. The plane made stopovers in Ireland and Bulgaria, reportedly for refueling, before reaching Israel.

Washington told Israel the deportations were carried out because the individuals were residing illegally in the United States. Israel’s Shin Bet security service approved their transfer after determining they had “no security background,” according to a security source cited by Haaretz.

The use of a jet owned by a Trump business associate to conduct what amounted to a government deportation operation points to a broader pattern: the collapse of any meaningful separation between the Trump administration’s immigration agenda and its political and financial relationships with Israel. ICE has increasingly relied on information supplied by pro-Israel doxxing groups — including Canary Mission, whose ties to senior administration officials have been documented — to identify and target pro-Palestinian students and activists.

Deporting Palestinians not to a country where they hold citizenship but to an occupied territory they may never have lived in, via routes that bypass standard government channels, is not a bureaucratic irregularity. It is a policy — one whose full scope has yet to be accounted for.