The Supreme Court issued an emergency order halting the Trump administration’s attempt to deport Venezuelan migrants to an El Salvadoran prison before they could challenge their deportation. This late-night intervention, a highly unusual rebuke, stemmed from the administration’s alleged violation of a previous court order and its deceptive actions toward multiple courts. The Court’s swift action, bypassing lower courts and even a dissenting justice’s full opinion, suggests a lack of trust in the administration’s claims. The 7-2 vote, including Chief Justice Roberts and other typically more conservative justices, signals a potential shift in the Court’s approach towards the administration’s actions.
Read More
The Supreme Court issued a temporary stay, preventing the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelan men detained in Texas and alleged to be gang members, pending further court order. Justices Thomas and Alito dissented from this decision, which comes after a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a similar request to halt deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. The ACLU, representing the detainees, argued for maintaining the status quo to ensure due process before deportation. The Supreme Court’s action follows an earlier ruling requiring habeas corpus petitions for deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, highlighting concerns about the administration’s use of this law and compliance with court orders.
Read More
The US Supreme Court’s order temporarily halting the deportations of Venezuelan migrants represents a significant development, one that carries considerable weight and potential consequences. This ruling, unlike previous pronouncements on similar matters, is exceptionally clear and unambiguous in its directive. The court explicitly instructs the government to refrain from removing any Venezuelan migrants currently detained, pending further court orders. The order’s straightforward language leaves little room for the kind of technical maneuvering or interpretation that has characterized past responses from the administration.
The potential for a constitutional crisis is undeniable should the administration choose to ignore this order. Past instances of the administration’s disregard for Supreme Court decisions raise serious concerns about the court’s authority and the very principle of the separation of powers.… Continue reading
Judge James Boasberg held the Trump administration in criminal contempt for defying his orders to halt the deportation of over 130 Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador without due process. The judge found sufficient evidence of “willful disregard” for his March directives, despite the administration’s claims of state secrets and lack of knowledge regarding the flights’ execution. Boasberg offered the administration options to avoid further contempt proceedings, including asserting custody of the deported migrants or identifying the officials responsible for the decision. He emphasized the foundational “rule of law” demanding compliance with court orders, irrespective of official position or claimed justification. Failure to comply could result in criminal contempt charges, prosecuted either by the Justice Department or an appointed outside attorney.
Read More
Photojournalist Philip Holsinger documented the arrival of Venezuelan migrants deported from the U.S. to El Salvador’s notorious CECOT prison. Despite many lacking criminal records, they were subjected to a brutal intake process involving forceful handling, hair shaving, and a stripping of their identity, culminating in a dehumanizing display of forced submission. This occurred amidst El Salvador’s controversial crackdown on gangs, resulting in a massive prison population increase and human rights concerns. Holsinger’s photographs capture the migrants’ despair and highlight the questionable circumstances of their imprisonment. The jarring contrast between the migrants’ perceived innocence and their harsh treatment underscores the larger issues of human rights violations and due process within El Salvador’s intensified security measures.
Read More
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, lifted a restraining order blocking the Trump administration’s deportation of Venezuelan migrants to an El Salvadoran prison under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. This ruling forces migrants to pursue individual habeas corpus petitions in Texas courts, rather than a class-action suit in D.C., significantly hindering their legal recourse. The majority opinion, while claiming to ensure due process, allows the administration to circumvent established legal procedures and potentially subject migrants to indefinite detention without legal representation. Dissenting justices sharply criticized the decision, highlighting the administration’s disregard for the rule of law and comparing it to past injustices.
Read More
Justice Jackson issued a scathing dissent against the Supreme Court’s decision to utilize the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants. The ruling, made without oral arguments or briefs via the “shadow docket,” allows the deportation of migrants to a notoriously harsh prison based on unsubstantiated claims of gang affiliation. Jackson argues this sets a dangerous precedent, echoing the flawed Korematsu decision, and criticizes the lack of transparency and deliberation in the court’s emergency rulings. She contends the Court’s hasty decision, lacking proper review, demonstrates a troubling pattern of disregarding due process.
Read More
The Trump administration deported Neri Jose Alvarado Borges, a Venezuelan man with no criminal record, to El Salvador, despite a court order halting such deportations. ICE officials wrongly linked Alvarado Borges’s autism awareness tattoos to gang affiliation, justifying his expulsion. This incident is one of many where Venezuelan migrants, including Luis Carlos Jose Marcano Silva, were similarly deported based on misinterpretations of their tattoos. Families of the deportees assert their relatives are not criminals and were driven to the U.S. by economic hardship and political instability in Venezuela.
Read More
President Trump denied signing the proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan migrants, despite his signature appearing on the document. He attributed the action to others, specifically mentioning Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while simultaneously defending the deportations as necessary to remove criminals. A White House statement later clarified that Trump’s remarks referred to the original 1798 Act, a claim contradicted by his own statements. Judge Boasberg, meanwhile, expressed anger at the administration’s handling of the case and vowed to investigate potential violations of his temporary restraining order.
Read More
The Trump administration deported hundreds of Venezuelan migrants based on flimsy evidence, primarily misinterpretations of their tattoos. ICE agents falsely linked innocuous tattoos—a soccer ball crown, a “I love you” hand gesture, and religious or family-themed imagery—to alleged Tren de Aragua gang membership. Many deportees were asylum seekers fleeing the very gang they were accused of joining, highlighting the arbitrary and unlawful nature of the deportations. This action circumvents due process, relying on the Alien Enemies Act to justify expulsions without judicial oversight, a tactic previously employed and challenged in court. The government’s actions raise serious concerns about the abuse of power and the erosion of immigrants’ constitutional rights.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood