The United States Supreme Court has blocked President Donald Trump’s controversial use of a centuries-old wartime law to fast-track deportations, in a ruling that underscores judicial resistance to executive overreach on immigration.
In a 7–2 decision handed down on Friday, the Court ruled that the administration’s attempted use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants was procedurally flawed. The majority opinion focused on the denial of due process, highlighting that some detainees were given less than 12 hours’ notice before removal without the chance to contest the decision.
The case arose from efforts to deport Venezuelan nationals allegedly linked to the Tren de Aragua gang, a criminal organisation with alleged transnational reach. The administration claimed the gang was acting under the influence of the Venezuelan regime and posed a national threat. However, a declassified intelligence report cast doubt on those claims, stating that there was no conclusive evidence of state-directed activity.
The Alien Enemies Act, part of the broader Alien and Sedition Acts signed into law during John Adams’s presidency, allows for the detention or deportation of nationals from hostile countries during times of declared war. Its invocation in a non-war context drew widespread legal criticism and fuelled public debate over the boundaries of presidential power in immigration matters.
President Trump responded to the ruling by condemning the Court’s decision as “a bad and dangerous day for America,” maintaining that the individuals posed an imminent threat to national security. He added that the administration had already deported more than 100 individuals under the act before the ruling was issued.
The Supreme Court did not rule on the broader legality of using the Alien Enemies Act in this way, but rather sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to determine the merits of the broader constitutional challenges.
Legal analysts view the decision as a significant check on the administration’s efforts to expand executive deportation powers. It affirms that even in the face of national security claims, procedural safeguards and the right to a fair hearing must be upheld.
newshub-finance
Recent Comments