The US Supreme Court has made a significant ruling permitting the Trump administration to continue deporting Venezuelans under an 18th-century law, provided they are allowed a court hearing. This decision was announced on Monday evening, overturning a lower court’s temporary block on this contentious policy.
Supreme Court’s Ruling Details
In a narrow 5-4 verdict, the justices did not address the legal implications surrounding President Donald Trump’s application of the Alien Enemies Act. Instead, they emphasized that Venezuelan migrants alleged to be gang members must be afforded a “reasonable time” to appeal their deportation. The majority opinion criticized the lawyers representing five Venezuelans for choosing to file their lawsuit in Washington instead of Texas, where the individuals were detained.
This ruling comes shortly after the deportation of 238 Venezuelans to a notorious prison in El Salvador, despite a directive from US District Judge James E. Boasberg instructing that the planes should return. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative member of the court who supported the decision, stated that all justices concurred on the necessity for these migrants to receive judicial review regarding their deportations. He noted, “The only question is where that judicial review should occur.”
Concerns from Dissenting Justices
Among the dissenting opinions, liberal justices expressed their apprehensions about the implications of the ruling. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan, challenged the legal validity of the ruling. Sotomayor critiqued the use of the Alien Enemies Act, which has been employed sparingly by past presidents during wartime, questioning the rationale behind its application in this context.
“There is, of course, no ongoing war between the United States and Venezuela. Nor is Tren de Aragua itself a ‘foreign nation’,” Sotomayor articulated, raising concerns over the swift actions of the Trump administration to execute deportations prior to judicial review.
Justice Jackson further criticized the court’s decision to address the matter through its emergency docket, arguing that it undermined transparency and accountability in significant judicial rulings.
In contrast, President Trump welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling as a pivotal moment for justice, describing it as a “great day for justice in America” on his social media platform, Truth Social. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, who recently visited the facility where the deported Venezuelans are held, echoed this sentiment, affirming that the ruling empowers Trump to utilize wartime authority to prevent what he termed an “invasion.”
On the other hand, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which represented the Venezuelan migrants in their legal challenge, acknowledged certain positive aspects of the ruling, particularly the recognition of due process rights for non-US citizens. ACLU Attorney Lee Gelernt declared that the emphasis on due process constituted an “important victory” amid ongoing discussions regarding the legitimacy of the deportations.
Reports have surfaced indicating that many individuals deported under the guise of gang membership may, in fact, be innocent, raising serious concerns about the accuracy of the claims made against them. Among those deported was Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran who had resided in the US for over a decade, with a lawyer recently admitting that his deportation resulted from an “administrative error.” The US government has since stated it lacks the capability to return him.
The legal battle continues as Trump and his supporters have called for the impeachment of Judge Boasberg, who initially halted the deportations, intensifying the conflict between the administration and the judiciary.