Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
Over the weekend, the Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to halt the deportation of Venezuelan detainees in Texas under a centuries-old wartime law, sparking a fierce legal and political battle over due process and executive authority.
Some shit you should know before you read: Shortly after returning to office, President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime law that grants the president broad authority to detain or deport non-citizens from nations considered hostile during times of war. Originally designed during the quasi-war with France, the act permits the executive branch to bypass standard immigration procedures when dealing with individuals deemed threats to national security. It’s rarely been used in US history—one of the most well-known examples being its role in justifying the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II—but it still gives the president wide latitude in immigration enforcement during wartime.
What’s going on now: On Saturday morning, the Supreme Court issued an order temporarily blocking the deportation of Venezuelan detainees held in Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, responding to an emergency appeal filed by the ACLU. The order instructed the government “not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.” While the justices didn’t elaborate on their reasoning, the ruling effectively halted the administration’s accelerated removal efforts under the law, giving detainees a chance to fight their cases in court. Though the vote count wasn’t officially published, the 7–2 decision was apparent based on the dissents filed by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
Justice Alito’s dissent accused the Court of acting quickly and without sufficient basis. He wrote that the relief was granted “literally in the middle of the night” and that the court “had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate.” Alito further criticized the lack of factual evidence in the ACLU’s filing, stating: “The only papers before this Court were those submitted by the applicants… the Court had not ordered or received a response by the Government regarding either the applicants’ factual allegations or any of the legal issues presented.”
He called the majority’s move “unprecedented and legally questionable relief” and warned that “both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law.”
This all comes as the White House continues to defend its use of the Alien Enemies Act despite mounting legal resistance and judicial setbacks. In a statement following the Supreme Court’s emergency injunction, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the wave of lawsuits as politically motivated, saying: “We are confident in the lawfulness of the Administration’s actions and in ultimately prevailing against an onslaught of meritless litigation brought by radical activists who care more about the rights of terrorist aliens than those of the American people.”
Critics, however, have accused the Trump administration of trampling on the rule of law and due process, especially after it deported individuals who had active court orders barring their removal. Senator Chris Van Hollen, after visiting one of the deported illegal immigrants now in El Salvador, condemned the administration for “blatantly, flagrantly … defying the order from the Supreme Court.” Representative Jamie Raskin echoed this alarm, warning that the use of foreign prisons to detain deportees “looks like a gangster state” and calling on Democrats to “become the leaders of a nationwide popular movement to arrest the descent into fascism in America.”
