Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
In a pivotal 5-4 decision Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a lower court’s block on the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, effectively clearing the path for the expedited deportation of Venezuelan nationals alleged to be members of the criminal group Tren de Aragua.
The ruling allows the government to resume deportations under the rarely invoked 1798 wartime law — but only if those detained are given the opportunity to challenge their removal in court.
“AEA detainees must receive notice… that they are subject to removal under the Act,” the court’s unsigned majority opinion stated. “The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief… before such removal occurs.”
The case stems from a March 15 temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who halted deportations of five Venezuelan plaintiffs while litigation proceeded. Boasberg had certified the suit as a provisional class action that extended protection to all noncitizen Venezuelans detained under the Trump directive.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a scathing dissent, warning that the decision undermines judicial oversight.
“The Government’s conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law,” Sotomayor wrote. “We, as a Nation and a court of law, should be better than this.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compared the majority’s decision to infamous wartime rulings such as Korematsu, lamenting the lack of transparency. “With more and more of our most significant rulings taking place in the shadows of our emergency docket… we are just as wrong now as we have been in the past,” she wrote.
The Supreme Court’s ruling comes after the administration declared Tren de Aragua a terrorist organization and invoked the Alien Enemies Act, which has historically been used only during major wars such as World War II. Trump claims the group is affiliated with the Venezuelan government and poses a national security threat, qualifying it under the “invasions or predatory incursions” clause of the law.
The administration has been criticized for using a controversial points-based system to identify alleged gang members, which includes superficial criteria such as tattoos. Civil rights advocates say this has led to false identifications and potential abuse.
Attorney Lee Gelernt, representing the Venezuelan plaintiffs for the ACLU, welcomed part of the ruling while criticizing its broader implications.
“We are disappointed we must restart the legal process in another court, but we’re encouraged the Supreme Court rejected the idea that the government can deport people without even giving them advance notice,” Gelernt said. “That’s a big win for due process.”
Despite the decision, detainees must still be given a chance to contest their removal, meaning legal battles will likely continue.
Attorney General Pam Bondi hailed the ruling as a victory for presidential authority. “An activist judge in Washington, DC does not have the jurisdiction to seize control of President Trump’s authority to conduct foreign policy and keep the American people safe,” she posted on X.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem echoed that sentiment: “Today’s SCOTUS ruling is a victory for commonsense security.”
Critics, however, warn the ruling sets a dangerous precedent for executive power. “This opens the door for any future administration to invoke war powers against immigrant communities with limited oversight,” said immigration attorney Carlos Mendoza.
Until now, the Alien Enemies Act has been used only during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. Trump’s decision marks the first time in U.S. history the law has been used to deport individuals from a nation with which the U.S. is not officially at war.
As deportation flights prepare to resume, the legal and political fallout is far from over.
