Thirty-five detained Venezuelans, wrongly associated with gangs based solely on their tattoos, endured weeks in ICE detention, with some even facing school expulsion. None faced criminal charges. This incident highlights a broader concern regarding due process and the potential for arbitrary detention based on superficial assumptions. The lack of legal recourse for these individuals underscores a systemic vulnerability affecting all immigrants. Experts warn that such practices erode fundamental rights, jeopardizing the legal protections afforded to all.
Read More
The Supreme Court temporarily blocked Trump’s deportation of Venezuelan immigrants, citing a lack of due process, a ruling that followed an earlier mandate requiring notification and a reasonable opportunity to seek legal recourse before deportation. Trump criticized this decision, claiming the inability to provide trials for all immigrants slated for deportation. He argued that affording due process to every individual would be impractical, despite the Court’s order stemming from an emergency petition alleging violations of that very process. This action comes despite Trump previously praising the conservative-leaning Supreme Court for its rulings in his favor.
Read More
In *A.A.R.P. v. Trump*, the Supreme Court issued a late-night order halting the Trump administration’s deportation of Venezuelan immigrants. The administration allegedly moved these immigrants to a Texas facility, provided inadequate notice of deportation in English to primarily Spanish-speaking individuals, and planned immediate removal under the Alien Enemies Act, potentially violating a prior Supreme Court ruling. This action seemingly circumvented the Court’s previous mandate for due process before deportation. Justices Thomas and Alito dissented, with a further statement expected from Justice Alito.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker