Latest news with #ImmigrationNationalityAct
Time of India
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Kristi Noem called ‘dangerously dumb' after Senate ‘habeas corpus' blunder; What she said about it
In a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on Tuesday, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sparked controversy after mischaracterising the constitutional principle of habeas corpus . Her comments prompted an immediate correction from Senator Maggie Hassan and ignited a flurry of online criticism. When asked by Senator Hassan, a Democrat from New Hampshire , to define habeas corpus, Noem responded, 'Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, to suspend their right to...' before being cut off. Senator Hassan firmly replied, 'Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens , and hold them indefinitely for no reason. It is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea.' Noem then rephrased her answer, stating, 'I support habeas corpus.' But she added, 'I also recognise that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not.' This exchange came amid rising concerns that the Trump administration may attempt to suspend the centuries-old legal safeguard as part of its aggressive immigration enforcement strategy. Live Events Suspension talk: Trump aide fuels debate The discussion follows earlier remarks by Stephen Miller , White House deputy chief of staff, who on 9 May told reporters the administration was 'actively looking at' suspending habeas corpus. He said, 'The Constitution is clear… the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus could be suspended in time of invasion… So that's an option we're actively looking at.' Miller further suggested that courts might not even have jurisdiction, stating, 'Congress passed a body of law known as the Immigration Nationality Act which stripped Article III courts… of jurisdiction over immigration cases.' The Trump administration has argued that the U.S. is facing an 'invasion' of illegal migrants, invoking language typically associated with war or national emergency. The aim is to expedite deportations without lengthy legal proceedings. However, this framing has been widely challenged in courts and the press. What is 'Habeas corpus'? Habeas corpus—Latin for 'you have the body'—is a legal doctrine that dates back to English common law and was codified in the U.S. Constitution to ensure that the government must justify detaining any person before a neutral judge. The Constitution only allows its suspension 'when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.' Historically, suspension has occurred just four times. President Abraham Lincoln first suspended it during the Civil War to detain Confederate sympathisers, a move initially rebuked by the Supreme Court's then-Chief Justice Roger Taney. Congress later granted Lincoln retroactive approval. It was suspended again under President Ulysses S. Grant to combat Ku Klux Klan violence, in the Philippines in 1905, and in Hawaii after the Pearl Harbour attack in 1941. Legal scholars, including now-Justice Amy Coney Barrett, have noted that although the Constitution does not specify which branch may suspend habeas corpus, most agree that only Congress holds that power. Following the gaffe, Kristi Noem has come under intense scrutiny on social media after a video of her misdefining the legal principle of habeas corpus during a Senate hearing went viral. The moment was posted on X (formerly Twitter) by political commentator Brian Krassenstein. 'We are living in the dumbest of times,' Krassenstein wrote, summing up what many users echoed in the comments. — krassenstein (@krassenstein) The backlash was swift and biting. One user responded, 'I was laughing so hard! That's why she plays dress-up, because she can't do anything else.' Another added, 'Dangerously dumb.' Comments ranged from blunt jabs—'She's as dumb as a bag of rocks'—to more pointed speculation: 'She's playing dumb. Has to be.' Another said plainly, 'The head of the department is freaking CLUELESS! My God!' The social media storm erupted after Noem told Senator Maggie Hassan during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing that habeas corpus was 'a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country.' Hassan, a Democrat and former attorney, immediately corrected her: 'Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people.' Judiciary pushback likely John Blume, professor at Cornell Law School, said Noem's remarks reflect either 'a fundamental misunderstanding' or deliberate misinformation. 'She was giving an answer she knew was wrong to appease the president,' he told reporters. Blume also cast doubt on the administration's ability to suspend habeas corpus, even under claims of invasion. 'That position would be very unlikely to fly with the U.S. Supreme Court,' he added. This is not the administration's first brush with sweeping legal authority. Trump previously cited the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants alleged to be gang members. Federal courts across states including New York, Texas, and Pennsylvania blocked the move, citing insufficient evidence of a true national threat. Unlike previous administrations, even during times of crisis, President Trump's team appears more willing to stretch executive power. After the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush chose not to suspend habeas corpus but instead detained terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court later ruled in 2008 that detainees had the right to challenge their detention under habeas corpus. Senator Hassan pressed Noem further on whether she would follow a hypothetical court ruling overturning a presidential suspension of habeas corpus. Noem responded, 'I'm following all court orders… as is the president.' To which Hassan responded bluntly, 'That is obviously not true for anybody who reads the news.' A divided government, a divided opinion Any attempt to suspend habeas corpus now would face steep hurdles. With only narrow Republican majorities in Congress, gaining legislative support would be difficult. Courts, too, remain a bulwark against executive overreach, as seen in repeated rulings that have blocked Trump-era immigration measures. Still, the administration's interest in circumventing traditional legal pathways to speed up deportations signals a concerning shift. At its core, the clash over habeas corpus is more than a political spat—it's a test of the balance between national security and civil liberties. And for many, the answer should never be ambiguous.
Time of India
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
White House says Donald Trump is eyeing habeas corpus suspension. What would it mean for migrants?
President Donald Trump is considering suspending habeas corpus as part of a sweeping crackdown on immigration, according to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Speaking to reporters outside the White House on Friday, Miller said the administration is 'actively looking at' the option and suggested that it may be justified under the Constitution. 'Well, the Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,' Miller said. 'So I would say that's an option we're actively looking at. Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.' Miller's remarks are the clearest indication yet that Trump may invoke the clause in Article I of the Constitution which permits the suspension of habeas corpus 'unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.' Operation Sindoor PM Modi meets NSA, chiefs of armed forces amid spike in tensions with Pak India's air defence systems shoot down Pak drones in J&K, Punjab & Rajasthan Several airports in India to be closed till May 15 - check list Miller argued that current immigration challenges amount to an 'invasion' and said the courts have repeatedly overstepped their authority in immigration matters. 'Congress passed a body of law known as the Immigration Nationality Act, which stripped Article 3 courts. .. of jurisdiction over immigration cases,' he said. 'The courts are at war – these radical rogue judges – with the legislative branch as well, too. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Only a transplant will give my son a chance at living a life Give Hope India Donate Now Undo So all of that will inform the choice that the President ultimately makes.' What is habeas corpus? Habeas corpus is a cornerstone of legal protections in the United States, requiring authorities to justify the detention of individuals before a judge. Migrants frequently use it to challenge deportations and prolonged detentions. The Constitution allows for its suspension only in extraordinary circumstances, such as rebellion or invasion. Legal experts have warned that any unilateral move by Trump to suspend habeas corpus would be unconstitutional. Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck wrote, 'The near-universal consensus is that only Congress can suspend habeas corpus – and that unilateral suspensions by the President are per se unconstitutional.' He added that 'suggesting the administration would suspend habeas corpus if it disagrees with how courts rule in these cases' is not a viable constitutional argument, as reported by The Hill. The writ has only been suspended four times in US history: during the Civil War, Reconstruction in South Carolina, a 1905 insurrection in the Philippines, and following the attack on Pearl Harbor. In each case, the government cited a clear and immediate national security emergency. The Trump administration has already tested the limits of executive power by invoking the 1789 Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged gang members from Venezuela. But federal judges, including a Trump appointee, ruled those actions unlawful, stating the administration had not proven the US was under invasion.
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Experts say Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil can't be deported without due process
The detaining of Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University student and Palestinian activist who possessed a green card, has raised questions about the deportation risks faced by lawful permanent residents amid the Trump administration's escalating crackdown on immigration. President Donald Trump's administration, which has alleged that Khalil was a supporter of Hamas, has said it has the authority to deport Khalil under the Immigration and Nationality Act. "Secretary [Marco] Rubio reserves the right to revoke the visa of Mahmoud Khalil under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Secretary of State has the right to revoke a green card or a visa for individuals who are adversarial to the foreign policy and national security interests of the United States of America," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a press conference this week. MORE: Activist Mahmoud Khalil asked Columbia University for legal support day before ICE arrest, his wife says Khalil, whose detention has sparked protests this week, is married to an American citizen who is eight months pregnant. Under the Immigration Nationality Act, which experts say is rarely invoked, the government can charge a green card holder as being deportable without being convicted of a crime if there are reasonable grounds to believe they engaged in certain criminal or terrorist activities. But experts and immigration attorneys ABC News spoke with said the statute does not give the secretary of state the power to deport green card holders like Khalil without going through a procedure. "The way the statute is constructed, it doesn't mean that Secretary Rubio can just say, 'Oh, I determined this, and therefore we're just going to deport you out of the country,'" said Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You would still need to go through a process." After the federal government invokes the statute, individuals like Khalil are entitled to argue their case before an immigration judge. Khalil is set to appear before an immigration judge later this month in Louisiana. "There are some due process and protective procedures that the person is entitled to," Chen said, "including being given a notice of the charges, and an opportunity to confront that evidence and to bring his or her own evidence in response." Chen told ABC News that typically it can take months or even years for immigration cases to "go from start to finish" -- but because of Khalil's "unique circumstances," a judge can prioritize a case and expedite the process. Experts told ABC News there are a number of reasons why an individual could lose their green card, including marriage fraud, immigration fraud, violent crimes and other offenses. Andrew Nietor, an immigration attorney, told ABC News said that while there are cases where the government invokes the Immigration and Nationality Act for certain green card holders with criminal convictions, he said he has never seen a case like Khalil's. "I've never seen this ground of deportation invoked," Nietor said. "It's almost always a green card holder who is almost always in deportation proceedings because of some type of criminal conviction." Experts say Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil can't be deported without due process originally appeared on
