A federal judge has slammed the brakes on President Trump's attempt to fast-track deportations of Venezuelan migrants. The case has been closely followed by not only migrants but also many who are concerned with human rights.
Alien Enemies Act
The underlying law the Trump administration is using to deport immigrants without due process is the Alien Enemies Act (AEA). The Act was passed in 1798 and grants the President of the United States the authority to detain or deport non-citizens from countries with which the U.S. is at war. This law is part of the broader Alien and Sedition Acts, which were enacted during a time of heightened tension with France. The act allows the president to act without due process during wartime, meaning that those affected do not have the right to a hearing or a trial to contest their deportation.
The Alien Enemies Act has only been used three times in U.S. history — during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. However, earlier this spring, Trump invoked the Act to expedite deportations during peacetime. The president invoked the Act to deport Venezuelan nationals accused of gang affiliation.
Tren de Aragua
The gang is the Venezuelan organization Tren de Aragua (TdA). Formed in 2005, this gang has engaged in drug trafficking, human smuggling, extortion, and murder. TdA controls key drug routes and has significant power in Colombia, Brazil, and beyond. Their activities cause terrible regional violence and instability. Despite Venezuelan efforts to dismantle them, corruption and limited resources hinder progress.
While TdA remains a major transnational threat and has prompted international law enforcement cooperation to address its widespread criminal impact, it’s not invading the United States. While the Trump administration has portrayed TdA as a significant threat to justify strict immigration measures, experts argue that this characterization is exaggerated. TdA has a presence in the U.S., but it is a criminal organization, not a government seeking to obtain and control U.S. territory. Even how organized it is is up for debate. Although members have committed horrific crimes in the U.S., such as murder and sex trafficking, the gang operates more as a loose collection of franchises rather than a cohesive organization.
TdA is not affiliated with (let alone controlled by) the Venezuelan government or President Nicolás Maduro. While there were past instances where TdA may have received some level of protection from the Venezuelan government, this relationship no longer exists. A recent National Intelligence Council assessment used information from U.S. intelligence agencies to determine that although TdA might have some low-level contacts within Maduro's government, he does not command them. This indicates that any claims of TdA acting under the direction of the Maduro regime are unfounded.
The U.S. has labeled TdA as a terrorist organization, which can allow for an increased focus on law enforcement efforts, but that is not the same thing as declaring war (which only Congress can do) or having war declared on the U.S.
We wrote about these issues previously, noting before the election that invoking the Alien Enemies Act to justify deportations without due process would be a difficult legal argument to make.
Deportation Attempt Raises Lawsuit
Despite significant legal questions, on March 15, Trump attempted to use the AEA to deport five Venezuelans that he claimed were associated with the TdA. He signed a proclamation under the AEA, declaring that all Venezuelan citizens aged 14 or older who were members of TdA and present in the United States could be removed as alien enemies. The White House issued a proclamation labeling TdA as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, claiming it had thousands of members conducting "irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions" against the United States.
Predictably, this raised concerns. Civil rights groups like the ACLU and Democracy Forward quickly filed a lawsuit, arguing that invoking this act during peacetime was unlawful and aimed at bypassing standard immigration laws.
The plaintiffs, who were being kept in detention centers across the U.S., faced imminent risk of removal to countries like El Salvador or Venezuela without due process. Reports indicated that they were being transferred rapidly and facing summary removals with less than 24 hours' notice. These individuals had pending asylum applications and feared persecution if returned to Venezuela due to their political beliefs and actions against the current regime. If removed from U.S. jurisdiction, they would face life-threatening conditions in notorious foreign prisons like CECOT in El Salvador.
Attorneys from the ACLU and Democracy Forward brought a lawsuit on behalf of the detained Venezuelans in various federal courts, some of which have already issued temporary blocks. One of the courts in which Trump’s order was challenged was the federal court for the Southern District of Texas, in the case J.A.V. v. Trump. There, the plaintiffs asked Judge Fernando Rodriguez, Jr. to do something about the situation ASAP by issuing a temporary restraining order.
The Trump administration contested this TRO, asking the Supreme Court to intervene. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court mandated that migrants must be allowed to contest deportations in court through habeas corpus in the jurisdiction where they were detained, but nonetheless overturned the restraining order, temporarily allowing deportations under the Act to continue. It did this in April, in a "shadow docket" decision focused on legal procedure. The Supreme Court did not issue a ruling on the merits.
We now have a ruling from a federal court judge on the merits of using the Alien Enemies Act.
Plaintiff’s Case
The plaintiffs argued that the Trump administration’s actions exceeded the authority granted by the AEA. Specifically, they contended that TdA did not constitute a "foreign nation or government," nor was it engaging in an "invasion" as required by the AEA's statutory predicates. They further claimed that the government's application of the AEA bypassed established immigration procedures like the Immigration and Nationality Act and humanitarian protections designed to prevent individuals from being sent to countries where they might face torture or persecution, while also denying them due process rights.
Judge’s Ruling
U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, appointed by President Trump during his first term, issued a 36-page opinion ruling that the Trump administration exceeded the scope of the AEA based on his statutory interpretation of the Act. The AEA allows for the detention and removal of individuals considered "alien enemies" during times of war or when an invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated or threatened by a foreign nation or government.
Judge Rodriguez emphasized that "invasion" and "predatory incursion" have specific meanings rooted in historical context. He concluded that these terms traditionally refer to military actions or organized armed forces entering a territory with the intent to conquer or control. While TdA members were accused of criminal activities within the U.S., these actions did not constitute a military invasion or predatory incursion as understood at the time of the AEA's enactment. Judge Rodriguez also found insufficient evidence in Trump’s proclamation to link Venezuela to TdA’s activity, thus constituting action by a "foreign nation or government" as required under the AEA.
Although not central to his ruling on exceeding statutory authority, Judge Rodriguez highlighted procedural due process issues related to notice and opportunity for detainees to challenge their designation as alien enemies. He pointed out deficiencies in providing adequate time and means for affected individuals to seek judicial review before deportation.
The Upshot
In short, Judge Rodriguez found no legal basis for using the AEA against TdA members as described. He concluded that President Trump's invocation of the AEA through this proclamation exceeded what Congress intended when enacting the statute. The judge thus ruled that the federal government is permanently enjoined from detaining, transferring, or removing not only the named plaintiffs, but anyone else in a similar position.
While the order permanently bars deportations under this law in the Southern District of Texas, White House spokesman Kush Desai defended Trump's mandate and suggested appeals to higher courts would soon be underway. Nothing in the order prohibits federal enforcement efforts under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows for deportations with due process.
Related Resources:
- Supreme Court Allows Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
- Trump Invokes Alien Enemies Act to Deport Venezuelan Nationals (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- Federal Law Prohibits the Deportation of Incarcerated U.S. Citizens (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
