logo
Supreme court blocks Trump bid to resume deportations under 1798 law

Supreme court blocks Trump bid to resume deportations under 1798 law

Yahoo17-05-2025

The supreme court has rejected the Trump administration's request to remove a temporary block on deportations of Venezuelans under a rarely used 18th-century wartime law.
Over two dissenting votes, the justices acted on an emergency appeal from lawyers for Venezuelan men who have been accused of being gang members, a designation that the administration says makes them eligible for rapid removal from the United States under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
The court, which returned the case to a federal appeals court, had already imposed a temporary halt on deportations from a north Texas detention facility in a middle-of-the-night order issued last month.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
Donald Trump responded on social media, with a post that claimed: 'THE SUPREME COURT WON'T ALLOW US TO GET CRIMINALS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!'
'The Supreme Court of the United States is not allowing me to do what I was elected to do,' Trump added in a subsequent post, in which he also claimed, falsely, that the justices 'ruled that the worst murderers, drug dealers, gang members, and even those who are mentally insane, who came into our Country illegally, are not allowed to be forced out without going through a long, protracted, and expensive Legal Process, one that will take, possibly, many years for each person.'
Related: Alien Enemies Act: what is it and can Trump use it to deport gang members?
The case is among several making their way through the courts over the president's proclamation in March calling the Tren de Aragua gang a foreign terrorist organization engaged in an 'invasion of the United States', and as such subject to deportation under the 1798 statute. However, a recently declassified memo showed US intelligence agencies rejected a key claim the administration made to justify invoking the wartime law – that Venezuela's government was orchestrating the gang's operations.
The supreme court case stems from a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Texas, challenging Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. At issue is whether people must have the opportunity to contest their removal from the United States, without determining whether Trump's invocation of the law was appropriate.
'We recognize the significance of the government's national security interests as well as the necessity that such interests be pursued in a manner consistent with the constitution,' the justices said in an unsigned opinion.
In a statement, Lee Gelernt, the deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project and lead counsel, said: 'The court's decision to stay removals is a powerful rebuke to the government's attempt to hurry people away to a Gulag-type prison in El Salvador. The use of a wartime authority during peacetime, without even affording due process, raises issues of profound importance.'
At least three federal judges have said Trump was improperly using the AEA to speed deportations of people the administration says are Venezuelan gang members.
On Tuesday, a judge in Pennsylvania signed off on the use of the law.
The court-by-court approach to deportations under the AEA flows from another supreme court order that took a case away from a judge in Washington DC and ruled detainees seeking to challenge their deportations must do so where they are held.
The justices said in April that people must be given 'reasonable time' to file a challenge.
The court has rejected the 12 hours the administration has said would be sufficient, but has not otherwise spelled out how long it meant.
The US district judge Stephanie Haines ordered immigration officials to give people 21 days in her opinion in which she otherwise said deportations could legally take place under the AEA.
In its opinion, the supreme court pointed to the case of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland resident the administration admitted it wrongly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador as a result of an 'administrative error'. The president and other high-ranking administration officials have repeatedly said Ábrego García would never be allowed back in the US, despite a supreme court order instructing the government to 'facilitate' his return.
Related: Venezuelans deported by Trump are victims of 'torture', lawyers allege
Highlighting the administration's argument that it was 'unable to provide for the return of an individual deported in error to a prison in El Salvador', the court concluded that the 'detainees' interests at stake are accordingly particularly weighty'.
'Under these circumstances, notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process right to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster,' the justices wrote.
However, the court also made clear that it was not blocking other ways the government may deport people.
The decision comes one day after the court appeared troubled by an executive order Trump signed on his first day in office that seeks to end birthright citizenship, which contradicts precedent upholding the plain text of the 14th amendment as granting citizenship to 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump suggests terminating Musk's US government contracts, subsidies
Trump suggests terminating Musk's US government contracts, subsidies

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump suggests terminating Musk's US government contracts, subsidies

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump suggested on Thursday that he may terminate U.S. government contracts and subsidies given to Elon Musk's companies, as the public feud between the two men escalates over a tax and spending bill. "The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts," Trump said in a Truth Social post. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Junk Fees, Airport Security, No Tax on Tips: 7 Travel Bills in Congress We're Tracking
Junk Fees, Airport Security, No Tax on Tips: 7 Travel Bills in Congress We're Tracking

Skift

time11 minutes ago

  • Skift

Junk Fees, Airport Security, No Tax on Tips: 7 Travel Bills in Congress We're Tracking

Although travel isn't at the top of Congress' agenda, lawmakers in Washington are discussing several bills that would impact the industry. Travel and tourism isn't at the top of Congress' agenda, which this month is dominated by debate over the President Donald Trump-backed 'big, beautiful' tax and spending bill. But that doesn't mean that lawmakers aren't attempting to make laws that would directly affect the hotel, lodging, air travel, and cruise industries. Here are seven such federal bills to watch heading into the summer: 1: Hotel Fees Transparency Act of 2025 Introduced by Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), this bipartisan bill targets 'unfair and deceptive advertising of prices for hotel rooms and other places of short-term lodging.' Bill co-sponsors include Reps. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), Russell Fry (R-S.C.), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.), Craig Goldman (R-Texas), Eugene Vindman (D-Va.) and André Carson (D-Ind.). The bill mandates that hotels and short-term rental providers must: Display the 'total services price, if a price is displayed, in any advertisement, marketing, or price list wherever the covered services are displayed, advertised, marketed, or offered for sale.' Disclose 'the total services price at the time the covered services are first displayed to [an] individual and anytime thereafter throughout the covered services purchasing process.' Disclose before a final purchase 'any tax, fee, or assessment imposed by any government entity, quasi-government entity, or government-created special district or program on the sale of covered services.' The bill passed the U.S. House on a voice vote in April. The U.S. Senate is now considering the measure. There, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) has introduced a Senate version of the Hotel Fees and Transparency Act of 2025, which is co-sponsored by Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Shelley Moo

Donald Trump's Pardon For NBA YoungBoy Could Be In Jeopardy
Donald Trump's Pardon For NBA YoungBoy Could Be In Jeopardy

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Donald Trump's Pardon For NBA YoungBoy Could Be In Jeopardy

Hip-Hop fans were elated when Donald Trump chose to pardon YoungBoy Never Broke Again's probation sentence for gun charges. However, Utah lawmakers didn't share that excitement and may look to fight against the decision. 'We are extremely proud of the work our investigator and prosecutors did on this case, as well as grateful for all the help we received from other local and federal agencies,' Cache County attorney Taylor Sorensen and Sheriff D. Chad Jensen wrote in a joint statement to KUTV. 'Mr. Gaulden [YB] pled guilty to the charges in this investigation, and we feel strongly the Justice System in Cache County is far from a 'weaponized system of justice.' We have highly trained, honest, experienced and professional sheriff's investigators and county prosecutors, along with respected District Court Judges and Defense Attorneys.' Trevor Lee, a member of the Utah House District 16, supported his perspective on X. 'As a state we should still go after him,' he wrote in a now-deleted tweet. It is unclear whether Utah lawmakers will be successful, but it is clear where they stand on YoungBoy Never Broke Again. The Baton Rouge, La. rapper had been living in the state for a few years now while serving his house arrest sentence. Last year, he pleaded guilty to felonious gun possession charges and was sentenced to 23 months in prison, five years of probation, and had to pay $200,000 for a separate gun charge. This past March, he was released from prison and credited for time served, allowing him to return to home confinement, which he completed in April. Donald Trump's pardon eliminated his probation sentence and he expressed his gratitude via social media. 'I want to thank President Trump for granting me a pardon and giving me the opportunity to keep building — as a man, as a father, and as an artist,' he wrote on Instagram. More from Donald Trump Announces Travel Ban And Restrictions Affecting 19 Countries Following Terrorist Attack In Colorado Elon Musk Slams Donald Trump Agenda Bill Days After White House Exit New Orleans Prison Escapee Claims His Innocence, Pleads For Help From Donald Trump, Meek Mill

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store