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
The White House is exploring all legal options to expedite deportations, including potentially suspending the writ of habeas corpus for migrants, a measure previously employed by past presidents during national crises. This follows criticism of the administration’s deportation rate, which, while significantly reducing border crossings, has not yet met the ambitious goals set by some conservatives. Press Secretary Leavitt affirmed the administration’s commitment to exploring all legal and constitutional avenues to achieve its deportation objectives. The administration points to a dramatic decrease in border crossings as evidence of its success.
Read More
In New Orleans, ICE deported two families, including three U.S. citizen children and a pregnant mother, under questionable circumstances. The deportations violated ICE’s own protocols regarding access to legal counsel and care for minors, leaving families incommunicado and preventing legal intervention. One child with cancer was deported without medication, and another family’s habeas corpus petition was not addressed before deportation. These actions are widely condemned as inhumane, unlawful, and a shocking abuse of power.
Read More
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ denial of the Trump administration’s request for a stay in the Abrego-Garcia case is a significant development, underscoring the court’s commitment to upholding the rule of law. The court’s decision wasn’t merely a procedural ruling; it was a forceful rebuke of the executive branch’s actions. It serves as a stark warning against the erosion of fundamental legal principles and the potential for executive overreach.
The core issue revolves around the deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, despite a previous court order prohibiting such action without due process. This deportation was deemed a blatant disregard for legal mandates, a violation of established judicial authority.… Continue reading
The Colorado Supreme Court unanimously rejected a habeas corpus petition filed by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NRP) seeking to move five elephants from Cheyenne Mountain Zoo to a sanctuary. The court affirmed that habeas corpus applies only to persons, and elephants, regardless of their intelligence or emotional complexity, are not considered persons under the law. The zoo had argued the elephants received excellent care, and the court’s decision upheld the lower court’s ruling. The NRP, while expressing disappointment, stated this loss was expected in the ongoing fight for animal rights.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood