The US Supreme Court issued a temporary injunction preventing the Trump administration from deporting approximately 50 Venezuelan immigrants detained in Texas. The administration planned to deport them to El Salvador under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, a law intended for wartime use.
The Court's decision, issued on a Saturday morning, mandates a waiting period until a lower court (the Fifth Circuit) rules. The Supreme Court's ruling states that the government is prohibited from deporting any member of the group pending further orders. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, with Alito to issue a separate opinion. The case highlights resistance to Trump's authoritarian actions and federal judges' role in obstructing his agenda.
The decision comes amidst growing resistance to Trump's authoritarian policies. Several examples are cited, including Harvard University's refusal to comply with Trump's demands, legal firms resisting his reprisals, and the Associated Press's legal battle over the naming of the Gulf of Mexico. Civil mobilization, including protests across the US, led by Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is also mentioned.
Trump used the Alien Enemies Act to expedite deportations, accusing immigrants of gang affiliation without due process. A previous Supreme Court ruling, although allowing Trump to continue using the law, stipulated that immigrants should have the opportunity to challenge deportation. The dissenting justices highlighted the law's limitations, asserting that it only grants the president the power to detain and expel foreign citizens from a hostile nation during wartime, a situation they argued isn't applicable to the current situation involving Venezuela.
The article concludes by emphasizing the dissenting judges’ concerns over the authoritarian implications of using this law to bypass legal protections. They warn that the government's actions could potentially expose both non-citizens and American citizens to indefinite confinement in foreign prisons without redress.