In a significant legal development, a federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to deport migrants under the auspices of a rarely-invoked 18th-century law. This decision came swiftly after the administration announced it would use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expedite the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members residing in the U.S.
U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg intervened on Saturday night, issuing a stay on deportations after learning that the government had already begun transporting migrants back to El Salvador and Honduras. These individuals were labeled deportable based on President Donald Trump’s new directive targeting the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua. El Salvador had already agreed to take up to 300 of these individuals. “I find it necessary to take immediate action,” Boasberg commented during the deliberations, initiated by a lawsuit from the ACLU and Democracy Forward. He ordered that any flights already in progress be reversed, highlighting that detaining the individuals for a short while posed no harm to the government.
The judge’s ruling was a direct response to Trump’s assertion that the Tren de Aragua poses a national security threat, warranting the use of the Alien Enemies Act. Historically, this act has only seen enforcement during wartime, with its last application occurring in World War II against Axis nationals. In a proclamation, Trump argued that the gang presented an invasion risk to the U.S., necessitating urgent deportation measures without the standard legal proceedings.
Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized Judge Boasberg’s injunction, claiming it undermined the president’s authority and jeopardized public safety. Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s proclamation framed the Venezuelan government as complicit with criminal elements that allegedly facilitate incursions into the U.S. territory, which justified the extreme measures. The administration insisted that the proclamation was signed the previous night, prompting immediate legal action from immigration attorneys to challenge impending deportations.
Judge Boasberg’s initial order halted the deportation of five specific Venezuelan individuals involved in the lawsuit, an action swiftly met with an appeal from the Trump administration. The Justice Department argued that obstructing presidential directives could critically hinder executive actions, particularly those concerning national security. However, Boasberg expanded the scope of his order beyond the initial plaintiffs, stalling deportations for two weeks and scheduling further court arguments.
The administration’s legal team, led by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign, argued that the president has significant latitude to address and mitigate threats under the contentious law. Citing past instances such as President Harry Truman’s post-World War II actions, Ensign maintained that the president’s executive power is broad in such matters. Conversely, ACLU’s Lee Gelernt challenged the administration’s interpretation, arguing that the president lacked authority to apply the law to criminal entities instead of recognized nations. Boasberg acknowledged the complexity of the legal precedents but deemed the case strong enough to justify halting the deportations.
Boasberg’s intervention reflects the broader implications of executing such a presidential proclamation, highlighting ongoing litigation that questions the limits of executive power. As discussions continue, advocates on both sides prepare for further legal confrontations over the administration’s immigration policies.
