Latest news with #1789AlienEnemiesAct
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Attorneys have had no contact with migrants held at military base in Djibouti, groups tell Supreme Court
A group of migrants that the Trump's administration has been holding on a military base in Djibouti have been unable to contact their attorneys, immigrant rights groups told the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The detainees, who were initially bound for South Sudan, are part of a high-profile emergency appeal pending at the Supreme Court over the administration's effort to remove migrants to places other than their homeland. Lower courts have required officials to provide those migrants additional notice and an opportunity to claim a fear of being tortured. Groups representing the migrants, including the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in a new brief that officials had 'set up a private interview room' on the base but that 'to date, counsel have not heard from them.' The migrants, the groups said, 'are stranded incommunicado in Djibouti, a country of which they have no knowledge, and en route to another country, South Sudan, where none have ever set foot and which remains engulfed in ongoing and intensifying armed conflict.' The Supreme Court has repeatedly sided with Trump amid a flurry of emergency cases that have reached its docket since the president returned to power. One issue on which the White House has not fared as well has been immigration, particularly in situations where due process concerns have been raised. The high court notably barred the administration last month from deporting other migrants under the 1789 Alien Enemies Act without more notice and a chance to have their cases reviewed. After a group of migrants facing deportation to countries other than their homeland sued over the administration's process, US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Joe Biden appointee, in March blocked officials from carrying out those removals without offering written notice and giving the targeted immigrants a chance to demonstrate they have a credible fear of persecution or torture in that other country. Murphy later said that the Trump administration 'unquestionably' violated his court order when it tried to transfer detainees to South Sudan. The Trump administration has argued Murphy's requirements are not included in federal law, and DHS officials have claimed they already have procedures in place to ensure that migrants are not persecuted in a third country. They have also described the migrants facing removal to South Sudan as having deep criminal records. But the attorneys representing the migrants at the Supreme Court pushed back on that assertion. The administration, they told the justices in their filing Wednesday, 'blatantly ignore the fact that many, if not the majority, of the class members in this case, including two of the named plaintiffs, have no criminal convictions whatsoever.' CNN's Priscilla Alvarez contributed to this report.
CNN
6 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
Attorneys have had no contact with migrants held at military base in Djibouti, groups tell Supreme Court
A group of migrants that the Trump's administration has been holding on a military base in Djibouti have been unable to contact their attorneys, immigrant rights groups told the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The detainees, who were initially bound for South Sudan, are part of a high-profile emergency appeal pending at the Supreme Court over the administration's effort to remove migrants to places other than their homeland. Lower courts have required officials to provide those migrants additional notice and an opportunity to claim a fear of being tortured. Groups representing the migrants, including the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in a new brief that officials had 'set up a private interview room' on the base but that 'to date, counsel have not heard from them.' The migrants, the groups said, 'are stranded incommunicado in Djibouti, a country of which they have no knowledge, and en route to another country, South Sudan, where none have ever set foot and which remains engulfed in ongoing and intensifying armed conflict.' The Supreme Court has repeatedly sided with Trump amid a flurry of emergency cases that have reached its docket since the president returned to power. One issue on which the White House has not fared as well has been immigration, particularly in situations where due process concerns have been raised. The high court notably barred the administration last month from deporting other migrants under the 1789 Alien Enemies Act without more notice and a chance to have their cases reviewed. After a group of migrants facing deportation to countries other than their homeland sued over the administration's process, US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Joe Biden appointee, in March blocked officials from carrying out those removals without offering written notice and giving the targeted immigrants a chance to demonstrate they have a credible fear of persecution or torture in that other country. Murphy later said that the Trump administration 'unquestionably' violated his court order when it tried to transfer detainees to South Sudan. The Trump administration has argued Murphy's requirements are not included in federal law, and DHS officials have claimed they already have procedures in place to ensure that migrants are not persecuted in a third country. They have also described the migrants facing removal to South Sudan as having deep criminal records. But the attorneys representing the migrants at the Supreme Court pushed back on that assertion. The administration, they told the justices in their filing Wednesday, 'blatantly ignore the fact that many, if not the majority, of the class members in this case, including two of the named plaintiffs, have no criminal convictions whatsoever.' CNN's Priscilla Alvarez contributed to this report.
CNN
6 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
Attorneys have had no contact with migrants held at military base in Djibouti, groups tell Supreme Court
A group of migrants that the Trump's administration has been holding on a military base in Djibouti have been unable to contact their attorneys, immigrant rights groups told the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The detainees, who were initially bound for South Sudan, are part of a high-profile emergency appeal pending at the Supreme Court over the administration's effort to remove migrants to places other than their homeland. Lower courts have required officials to provide those migrants additional notice and an opportunity to claim a fear of being tortured. Groups representing the migrants, including the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in a new brief that officials had 'set up a private interview room' on the base but that 'to date, counsel have not heard from them.' The migrants, the groups said, 'are stranded incommunicado in Djibouti, a country of which they have no knowledge, and en route to another country, South Sudan, where none have ever set foot and which remains engulfed in ongoing and intensifying armed conflict.' The Supreme Court has repeatedly sided with Trump amid a flurry of emergency cases that have reached its docket since the president returned to power. One issue on which the White House has not fared as well has been immigration, particularly in situations where due process concerns have been raised. The high court notably barred the administration last month from deporting other migrants under the 1789 Alien Enemies Act without more notice and a chance to have their cases reviewed. After a group of migrants facing deportation to countries other than their homeland sued over the administration's process, US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Joe Biden appointee, in March blocked officials from carrying out those removals without offering written notice and giving the targeted immigrants a chance to demonstrate they have a credible fear of persecution or torture in that other country. Murphy later said that the Trump administration 'unquestionably' violated his court order when it tried to transfer detainees to South Sudan. The Trump administration has argued Murphy's requirements are not included in federal law, and DHS officials have claimed they already have procedures in place to ensure that migrants are not persecuted in a third country. They have also described the migrants facing removal to South Sudan as having deep criminal records. But the attorneys representing the migrants at the Supreme Court pushed back on that assertion. The administration, they told the justices in their filing Wednesday, 'blatantly ignore the fact that many, if not the majority, of the class members in this case, including two of the named plaintiffs, have no criminal convictions whatsoever.' CNN's Priscilla Alvarez contributed to this report.
CNN
6 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
Attorneys have had no contact with migrants held at military base in Djibouti, groups tell Supreme Court
A group of migrants that the Trump's administration has been holding on a military base in Djibouti have been unable to contact their attorneys, immigrant rights groups told the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The detainees, who were initially bound for South Sudan, are part of a high-profile emergency appeal pending at the Supreme Court over the administration's effort to remove migrants to places other than their homeland. Lower courts have required officials to provide those migrants additional notice and an opportunity to claim a fear of being tortured. Groups representing the migrants, including the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said in a new brief that officials had 'set up a private interview room' on the base but that 'to date, counsel have not heard from them.' The migrants, the groups said, 'are stranded incommunicado in Djibouti, a country of which they have no knowledge, and en route to another country, South Sudan, where none have ever set foot and which remains engulfed in ongoing and intensifying armed conflict.' The Supreme Court has repeatedly sided with Trump amid a flurry of emergency cases that have reached its docket since the president returned to power. One issue on which the White House has not fared as well has been immigration, particularly in situations where due process concerns have been raised. The high court notably barred the administration last month from deporting other migrants under the 1789 Alien Enemies Act without more notice and a chance to have their cases reviewed. After a group of migrants facing deportation to countries other than their homeland sued over the administration's process, US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Joe Biden appointee, in March blocked officials from carrying out those removals without offering written notice and giving the targeted immigrants a chance to demonstrate they have a credible fear of persecution or torture in that other country. Murphy later said that the Trump administration 'unquestionably' violated his court order when it tried to transfer detainees to South Sudan. The Trump administration has argued Murphy's requirements are not included in federal law, and DHS officials have claimed they already have procedures in place to ensure that migrants are not persecuted in a third country. They have also described the migrants facing removal to South Sudan as having deep criminal records. But the attorneys representing the migrants at the Supreme Court pushed back on that assertion. The administration, they told the justices in their filing Wednesday, 'blatantly ignore the fact that many, if not the majority, of the class members in this case, including two of the named plaintiffs, have no criminal convictions whatsoever.' CNN's Priscilla Alvarez contributed to this report.
Reuters
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Lawmaker demands explanation for Trump administration's ouster of intelligence analysts
WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters) - The top Democrat on the U.S. House intelligence committee on Wednesday called on Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard to produce proof of the alleged political bias that led her to oust the heads of the intelligence community's highest analytical body. Gabbard's removal of the pair came after the National Intelligence Council produced an assessment contradicting the legal argument used by U.S. President Donald Trump to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua. The administration has used a claim that Tren de Aragua is coordinating its U.S. activities with the Venezuelan government of President Nicolas Maduro to invoke the 1789 Alien Enemies Act and justify deportations of alleged gang members to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. The ouster of Michael Collins as acting NIC chairman, and his vice chair, Maria Langan-Riekhof, was first reported by Fox News. Two sources familiar with the matter confirmed on condition of anonymity that Gabbard, an ardent Trump loyalist, had removed them and sent them back to their home intelligence agencies. One source said that she had yet to make a final decision on firing them entirely or bringing them back to the NIC. Gabbard's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Representative Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said in a letter to Gabbard that she had failed to inform the congressional intelligence panels of her decision to oust Collins and Langan-Riekhof. "According to anonymous sources cited in the Fox News story, you terminated these two individuals due to their supposed 'political bias,'' Himes wrote. 'This is an exceptionally serious allegation to make against career intelligence officers - and therefore an allegation that requires supporting evidence.' He asked Gabbard give the committee that proof by May 21. The NIC assessment released last week through a Freedom of Information Act request contradicted the administration's claim about the gang's connections to Venezuela's government. 'While Venezuela's permissive environment enables TDA to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States,' the assessment concluded. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, accused Gabbard in a statement of "purging intelligence officials over a report that the Trump administration finds politically inconvenient. Whatever the administration is trying to protect, it's not our national security." On a related matter, one source said that the CIA was 'pushing back hard' against an effort by Gabbard to take over the drafting of the top-secret Presidential Daily Brief, the daily compendium of the most classified U.S. intelligence prepared for the president. 'It's not a done deal,' the source said. The CIA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
