Trump Suggests Supreme Court Is ‘Illegally' Blocking His Lawless Deportations
Donald Trump is still seething at the Supreme Court after it issued a ruling Friday continuing to block his efforts to deport immigrants without due process by citing an archaic wartime law.
On Saturday, Trump shared a post on Truth Social from lawyer Mike Davis, one of his most extreme MAGA allies, claiming that the Supreme Court put 'an illegal injunction on the president of the United States, preventing him from commanding military operations to expel these foreign terrorists.'
Davis added in the post that Trump 'should house these terrorists near the Chevy Chase Country Club, with daytime release.' (Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh both live in Chevy Chase, Maryland.)
Trump shared another post from Davis complaining that the justices had blocked Trump from deporting undocumented immigrants 'without years of court process.' The president wrote, 'The Supreme Court must come to the RESCUE OF AMERICA.'
To be clear, the Supreme Court did not block Trump from deporting undocumented immigrants or foreign-born terrorists, but rather his effort to deport immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law infamously used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans.
Trump has deported hundreds of Venezuelans using the Alien Enemies Act, shipping the immigrants to prisons in El Salvador known for civil rights abuses. The basis for these deportations is that Trump's administration determined the immigrants to be members of a gang that the president has deemed a terrorist organization.
The administration's claims about the immigrants' gang ties appear to be extremely specious — and several courts have ruled that Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act is unlawful, because the law is meant to be used during an 'invasion' or 'predatory incursion' by a foreign nation, neither of which is happening.
The Supreme Court has not weighed in on whether Trump is using the Alien Enemies Act lawfully. Rather, the justices have taken issue with his failure to respect the immigrants' right to due process, as guaranteed by the Constitution.
The high court previously ruled that Trump must give immigrants the ability to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act. Last month, Trump's administration attempted a new round of deportations using the law. This time, immigrants were given written notice of their pending removal under the Alien Enemies Act, but only in English. They were given hours to contest their removals, and were not informed of their right to do so.
The Supreme Court stepped in, temporarily halting those removals. On Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision prohibiting more deportations under the Alien Enemies Act for now and sending the matter back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for further review.
Justices wrote that the government's notice to the immigrants facing deportation was insufficient: 'notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster.'
The justices quoted from their previous ruling directing the Trump administration to respect immigrants' due process rights: '[T]he Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in the context of removal proceedings,' they wrote.
Trump has now posted several complaints about the ruling, as has Stephen Miller, the president's deputy chief of staff.
'The courts are sabotaging democracy,' Miller wrote Saturday on X, as he shared a post with a screenshot of a finding in a CBS News/YouGov poll. The poll found that, as of late April, 56 percent of Americans approve of the Trump administration's program to find and deport immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally.
That same poll found, however, that two thirds of Americans believe that a noncitizen should get a court hearing or other U.S. legal process before Trump can deport them (as is the law.)
And the poll found 85 percent of Americans believe that if the Supreme Court rules against the Trump administration on a policy or executive action, the Trump administration should follow the court's ruling.
More from Rolling Stone
Trump's Plan to Kick Millions of Americans Off Medicaid, Explained
Transgender Troops Deserve the Right to Serve
Musicians Union Slams Trump's Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen Tantrum
Best of Rolling Stone
The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign
Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal
The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
35 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump admin officials blast LA Mayor Karen Bass' response to ICE raids — as cops clash with violent protesters
Several Trump administration officials fired back at Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass Friday after she pledged to oppose federal efforts to nab illegal immigrants — as cops in her city had to use flash bangs to disperse the violent mob of protesters who descended on the arrest sites. 'We will not stand for this,' Bass said in a statement released after federal immigration authorities arrested 44 people in raids across Los Angeles. 'I am deeply angered by what has taken place,' the Democrat mayor fumed, noting that her office 'is in close coordination with immigrant rights community organizations.' Advertisement 4 Bass slammed the Los Angeles immigration enforcement raids in a social media post. AFP via Getty Images White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller quickly dismissed Bass' declaration. 'You have no say in this at all,' Miller shot back on social media. Advertisement 'Federal law is supreme and federal law will be enforced,' he noted on X. Miller was one of several Trump administration officials that took issue with Bass' statements. 'They're Illegals. Not 'immigrants.' One just tried to burn Americans alive in Boulder,' White House adviser Sebastian Gorka wrote on X, referring to Colorado terror suspect Mohamed Soliman. The Egyptian national overstayed his tourist visa before allegedly firebombing a peaceful march for Israeli hostages still held by Hamas on Sunday in a heinous antisemitic attack. Advertisement 'If you're aiding and abetting them you're a criminal too,' Gorka said in response to the LA mayor's comments. 'Are you ready to be treated as a criminal? 'Because we are ready to treat you as one if you commit a crime,' he warned. 4 Miller noted that Bass has 'no say' in federal immigration enforcement. Chris Kleponis – CNP / MEGA 4 Miller was one of several Trump administration officials who reacted strongly to Bass' statement on the ICE raids. Stephen Miller, /X Advertisement Justice Department official Harmeet K. Dhillon was stunned by Bass' understanding of the law. 'It's amazing the number of elected officials who don't grasp the basics of federalism, or federal sovereignty over immigration issues, or the First Amendment,' Dhillon tweeted. The Los Angeles immigration raids sparked protests at the arrest sites, and at least one person was taken into custody for allegedly obstructing federal law enforcement. 'Federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle,' US Attorney Bill Essayli said in a statement. 'He was arrested for interfering with federal officers and will face arraignment in federal court on Monday.' 'Let me be clear: I don't care who you are — if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted.' Huerta is president of the California branch of the influential Service Employees International Union. 4 The raids sparked protests in Los Angeles. AP Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin decried the city's response to protesters' clashes with federal agents – which escalated hours after the raids. Advertisement 'Assaulting ICE enforcement officers, slashing tires, defacing buildings. 800 protestors have surrounded and breached the first layer of a federal law enforcement building in LA,' McLaughlin wrote on X. '@LAPD has not responded.' 'This violence against @ICEgov must stop.' Richard Grenell, President Trump's envoy for special missions, blamed Bass for the unrest. 'Karen Bass whipped all of this up. She attacked the rule of law. She undermined democracy,' Grenell wrote on X, sharing images of protesters attempting to block federal law enforcement vehicles. Advertisement 'The @MayorOfLA is creating chaos in LA,' he fumed. With Post wires
Hamilton Spectator
37 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs , deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations , Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act , to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort , forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Hamilton Spectator
37 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
A Virginia Democrat hunts for votes in rural pockets where MAGA has strengthened its grip
CULPEPER, Va. (AP) — Democratic politics in rural Virginia are not of a bygone era, according to Abigail Spanberger. The former congressional representative, now the Democratic nominee in the race to be Virginia's next governor , posts videos online of herself sitting in a car on an interstate highway that goes up and down the Appalachian Mountains. She has toured a small, family-owned oyster shucking and packaging operation along a quiet boat haven on the northern neck of Virginia. And last month, the nominee held a news conference at a small pharmacy in an agrarian hamlet outside of Richmond. In 2020, Spanberger narrowly ran ahead of former President Joe Biden in her congressional district, and she posted her best results by comparison in rural counties that heavily favored President Donald Trump, including Nottoway, Powhatan, Amelia and Louisa, according to an Associated Press analysis. It's a challenge that might be growing more formidable with each passing election cycle. Trump made gains in those counties in 2024, data show, and Republicans think they have solidified a shift in their direction in rural areas. In Virginia, rural residents made up about 2 in 10 voters last November, according to AP VoteCast. About 6 in 10 small-town or rural voters voted for the Republican candidate in the last two presidential elections and the last two midterm congressional elections. Spanberger became the nominee when no other Democrats ran for governor. Her opponent in the general election, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears , was the only Republican who gathered enough signatures to qualify for the top of the GOP ticket, leaving both parties with no contested race at the top of their June 17 primary ballots. A spokesperson for Earle-Sears said in an email that Spanberger's efforts to portray herself as an advocate for small-town Virginians would fall short. 'Rural voters see right through the rhetoric,' said press secretary Peyton Vogel. 'Democrats consistently push policies that hurt energy jobs, raise costs, and grow Washington DC's overreach. That's not a winning message in communities that value freedom, faith, and hard work.' Still, Spanberger seems determined to campaign beyond known Democratic strongholds, vying to winnow down conservative votes in ruby-red parts of Virginia. From the rolling hills of the Piedmont, where Trump won last year by some 20 points, to the Roanoke valley out west, Spanberger is seeking voters in the districts where Democrats once were competitive but Republicans now rule. 'We have to show how we govern,' Spanberger said in explaining her messaging. 'And the governing isn't just standing up to Donald Trump. It is clear and consequential, right?' Last month, Spanberger sat in a booth by the window of Frost Cafe in downtown Culpeper, Virginia, in the Piedmont region between Washington and Charlottesville. As she drank her coffee in the small town that was once part of her congressional district, constituents tapped on the window, pressing their noses to the glass and making hearts with their hands. A young boy hid behind a newspaper stand, peeking up at Spanberger as if she were a celebrity. When his family began to walk away, he knocked on the window and waved. Spanberger's presence in Trump territory comes as Democrats have nationally shown renewed interest in small-town America, launching listening tours in Kentucky, courting Minnesota farmers and looking for other ways to connect. In some ways, rural Virginia feels like Spanberger's home turf. Once a member of the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture, she has built a legacy tethered to touring farms and strolling through small towns where everybody knows everybody. She focused on low-profile , bucolic-minded bills such as expanding broadband , which was incorporated into the bipartisan infrastructure law passed by Congress in 2021. She helped pass another law making it easier for farmers and forestry professionals to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Some analysts say Trump's pillaging of federal contracts and volatile tariffs have given Spanberger and the Democrats an opening. 'If you look at the trade, if you look at Trump's tariffs, those have a huge impact on the price of agricultural products,' said Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington. 'The potential reduction in Medicaid, that's another area where there's going to be a disproportionate impact on rural areas.' Cue Spanberger's eight-point plan to make healthcare coverage more affordable in Southwest Virginia, which was published just as Congress weighs a budget bill that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates could reduce the number of people with health care by 8.6 million over a decade . Neal Osborne, a Bristol councilman representing the nearly 18,000-person city along the border with Tennessee, said Medicaid expansion and healthcare are top of mind for many people there. He pointed out that 150 people showed up when Spanberger visited Bristol back in January. 'We are a Republican stronghold,' said Osborne, who already has endorsed the Democrat. 'But if you do 2% better with southwest Virginia, that could be your margin of victory in a statewide. ... I am willing to go on a limb to say she will be back in southwest between now and before the election.' It's a strategy Spanberger has tapped before. After winning a tea party district in 2018, which had been represented by Republicans for decades, the moderate Democrat made a point of working on behalf of conservative strongholds in her district. Her ability to connect with farmers, fishermen and agricultural interests helped her keep her seat for three terms. Michael Carter Jr., of Carter Farms, said he was one of those rural constituents. A Black farmer in Orange County, he said that while Spanberger was in office, there was a continual back-and-forth between her staff and his family, which has owned their farm since 1910. He and his father would see her staff at community events. Spanberger's office asked for his feedback on legislation, he said. It was a meaningful relationship he had with a politician, and that meant something to him. 'It's not always the case that small farmers or even African Americans really feel like we get our voices heard,' Carter said. ___ Olivia Diaz is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. ___ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
