- The U.S. Supreme Court has sided with the Trump administration, lifting an injunction blocking the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act. The 5-4 ruling requires migrants to be given notice to challenge their deportation.
- Justice Kavanaugh emphasized that the disagreement was over where judicial review should occur. Justices Sotomayor and Jackson dissented, expressing concerns about the legal implications and the potential harm to the deportees.
- Trump’s executive order invoked the Alien Enemies Act to target alleged Tren de Aragua gang members as a “designated foreign terrorist organization.” However, the administration has offered little evidence regarding the gang affiliations of those who were deported.
Full Story
The U.S. Supreme Court has sided with the Trump administration, lifting a lower court order that blocked the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act.
Court’s ruling on deportation notice
In a 5-4 decision, the high court ruled that migrants being deported under the Alien Enemies Act must be given notice to challenge their deportation.
“The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”
Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in his concurring opinion, “The Court’s disagreement with the dissenters is not over whether the detainees receive judicial review of their transfers—all nine members of the Court agree that judicial review is available. The only question is where that judicial review should occur.”
The Court ruled that individuals challenging their removal should file in the district where they are being detained.
Sotomayor and Jackson pen the dissent
In her dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, as well as Amy Coney Barrett for some parts, criticized the Court’s legal conclusion as “suspect.”
Sotomayor wrote, “The Court does not mention the grave harm plaintiffs will face if they are erroneously removed to El Salvador or regard for the government’s attempts to subvert the judicial process throughout this litigation.”
Jackson also dissented, writing, “The President of the United States has invoked a centuries-old wartime statute to whisk people away to a notoriously brutal, foreign-run prison. For lovers of liberty, this should be quite concerning.”
The Alien Enemies Act and its historical use
The 1798 Alien Enemies Act grants the president the power — during a declared war or invasion — to apprehend non-naturalized individuals and remove them from the country.
In March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act. It’s a statute that has been used only three times in U.S. history — during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.
Trump’s order designated the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua (TdA), as a “foreign terrorist organization.”
Trump invokes the Alien Enemies Act
Last month, the Trump administration began deporting what they called suspected TdA members to a mega-prison in El Salvador. It’s unclear whether those who were already deported will be able to challenge their deportations under the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Following those deportations, D.C. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary injunction, blocking the Trump administration from removing Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act.
While the Trump administration has claimed that it is deporting TdA members, it has provided little evidence. According to a recent CBS News report, an “overwhelming majority” of those who were deported have not been charged with a crime. Illegal entry into the U.S. is a civil offense, while illegal reentry is considered a felony.
Attorney General Pam Bondi responds to Supreme Court decision
“Tonight’s decision is a landmark victory for the rule of law,” U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said on X. “An activist judge in Washington, D.C. does not have the jurisdiction to seize control of President Trump’s authority to conduct foreign policy and keep the American people safe.”
