The Supreme Court temporarily blocked President Trump’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan immigrants, citing insufficient notice and due process violations. The justices remanded the case to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for further review of the act’s legality and the required notice period. Justices Thomas and Alito dissented, arguing against the Court’s intervention. This decision effectively halts all deportations under the act until lower courts and potentially the Supreme Court definitively rule on its legality and procedural requirements.
Read More
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to temporarily block the deportation of Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act, citing insufficient notice and resources provided by the Trump administration before their removal. The court found the 24-hour notice given before deportation inadequate, mandating a lower court revisit the appropriate notice period. While not addressing the Act’s proper application, the decision grants temporary relief pending the lower court’s determination, acknowledging both national security interests and constitutional due process. Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, questioning the urgency of the situation and criticizing the lower court’s actions.
Read More
Following the March 23rd revocation of his F1 student visa, Aditya Harsono was detained by ICE four days later. The detention separated Harsono from his daughter, Adalet. This action highlights the potential consequences of visa revocations for international students. Further details regarding the circumstances surrounding the visa revocation and detention were not provided.
Read More
Georgia college student Ximena Arias-Cristobal’s ongoing detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after a seemingly routine traffic stop highlights a deeply troubling issue: the blurring lines between local law enforcement and immigration enforcement, and the potential for racial profiling. The incident raises serious questions about the process that led to her arrest and detainment, raising concerns far beyond her individual case.
The sequence of events leading to Ximena’s ICE custody is unclear, but it appears to involve a traffic stop where charges were later dismissed. This begs the question: what happened between the initial stop and her detention by ICE?… Continue reading
After over six weeks in Louisiana immigration detention, Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk returned to Boston. Her release followed a federal judge’s order, concluding that the government provided no evidence justifying her arrest beyond an op-ed she co-authored criticizing her university’s response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ozturk, who maintains her innocence, will continue her legal case, asserting that her detention violated her constitutional rights, including free speech. The judge’s ruling was later upheld by a federal appeals court, allowing her to participate remotely in Louisiana proceedings while continuing her doctoral studies.
Read More
White House advisor Stephen Miller confirmed the administration is considering suspending the writ of habeas corpus, citing the Constitution’s suspension clause applicable during invasion or rebellion. This aggressive action would escalate efforts to deport individuals without allowing legal challenges, mirroring past attempts to utilize the Alien Enemies Act. Federal judges have consistently rejected the administration’s “invasion” justification, emphasizing the clause’s requirement of a demonstrated threat to public safety. This move follows a pattern of defying court rulings against the administration’s deportation policies.
Read More
Stephen Miller’s recent statement regarding the Trump administration “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus is deeply troubling. The very suggestion of such an action strikes at the heart of fundamental American legal principles and raises serious concerns about the potential for authoritarian overreach. The idea that the government could detain individuals indefinitely without due process, without the right to challenge their imprisonment before a court, is a stark departure from the established rule of law.
This proposed suspension, even if framed within the context of the Constitution’s provision allowing for such action in cases of rebellion or invasion, is alarmingly vague.… Continue reading
Sergey Kostenyuk, a green card holder and Trump supporter, was arrested and detained by ICE for two months before his release on April 23rd. His detention stemmed from a 2018 felony conviction, despite his decades-long legal residency in the U.S. The arrest, orchestrated by undercover ICE agents, highlights concerns about the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown targeting even those with valid documentation. Kostenyuk’s case, along with others, exemplifies the broader debate surrounding due process and the impact of aggressive deportation policies on legal residents.
Read More
In Austin, Texas, Denisse Parra Vargas and her husband were detained by state troopers for an expired license plate and subsequently deported by ICE, despite their two youngest children being U.S. citizens. Ms. Parra Vargas, initially released with an ankle monitor, was later deported along with her children after a seemingly routine check-in appointment, during which she claims to have signed a document without fully understanding its implications. This incident follows similar cases where U.S. citizen children were deported with their parents, highlighting a concerning pattern of family separations and raising questions about due process and informed consent. Grassroots Leadership is pursuing legal action.
Read More
They voted for Trump, and now their son is in ICE detention. This situation highlights the complex interplay between political choices and personal consequences, a stark illustration of the adage “you reap what you sow.” The son’s detention stems from a prior criminal conviction, a fact that adds layers of complexity to the narrative.
The parents, staunch Trump supporters, believed his rhetoric on immigration. They likely felt that his tough stance on illegal immigration would benefit their community and align with their personal values. Their support wasn’t necessarily born out of malice, but rather from a sincere, albeit misinformed, belief in his promises.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood