An Absurd Rationale for Provoking a Constitutional Crisis - John McCormack - The Dispatch

Key Arguments Against the Alien Enemies Act for Mass Deportations

The article refutes the Trump administration's argument that the 1798 Alien Enemies Act is necessary for mass deportations, citing its impracticality and the availability of alternative legal avenues. The administration's claims of million-dollar trials and centuries-long processes to deport illegal immigrants are dismissed as hyperbole and propaganda.

The Act's Limited Scope

The Alien Enemies Act was applied only to a small percentage of Venezuelan illegal immigrants associated with the gang Tren de Aragua, not the entire population of illegal immigrants. The article emphasizes the significant difference between the administration's claim of necessity and the relatively small number of people affected.

Alternative Legal Processes and Budgetary Constraints

The article highlights the existing immigration law (Immigration and Nationality Act) and the adequate budget for deportations. The claim that million-dollar trials would be needed is countered by the actual number of deportations already conducted, suggesting the administration's claims are exaggerated.

Practical Limitations

• Reduced illegal immigration inflow under Trump's policies has made interior enforcement more difficult.
• Limited detention capacity restricts the scale of deportations.
• Reluctance to conduct large-scale worksite raids further hampers the pace of deportations.

Conclusion

The article concludes that the success of mass deportations does not depend on using the Alien Enemies Act. The administration's focus on this act is a distraction from practical obstacles and existing legal mechanisms for handling deportations, creating the potential for a constitutional crisis. The claims surrounding the Act's necessity are deemed unfounded and largely propagandistic.