A significant ruling was made by U.S. District Judge Stephanie Haines in Pennsylvania, allowing President Donald Trump to utilize the Alien Enemies Act for the deportation of Venezuelan citizens identified as members of the Tren de Aragua gang. This decision, rendered on Tuesday, marks a pivotal moment as it is reportedly the first instance where a federal judge endorsed Trump's declaration that the Tren de Aragua constitutes a foreign terrorist organization.
Judge Haines’ ruling is particularly notable because it invokes an 18th-century wartime law to facilitate the deportation of individuals labeled as gang affiliates. This proclamation, made by Trump, claims that the Tren de Aragua is conducting an invasion of the U.S. and grants the administration special powers to expedite deportations without the typical judicial procedures.
On the same day, another federal judge in the Western District of Texas temporarily halted the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations in that area. This ruling follows similar judgments from at least three other federal judges who have expressed concerns regarding the administration's alleged misuse of the Alien Enemies Act to accelerate the removal of individuals purported to be Venezuelan gang members.
Judge Haines emphasized that the administration has not provided adequate notice to individuals facing deportation under the Alien Enemies Act. She mandated that at least 21 days’ notice be given to those targeted for removal, a significant increase from the mere 12 hours that some individuals have previously received. In her ruling, Haines remarked, "This case poses significant issues that are deeply interwoven with the constitutional principles upon which this Nation's government is founded."
However, it is crucial to note that Haines did not rule on whether the administration could remove individuals under other immigration laws, nor did she clarify if Trump can invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport those who are not members of a foreign terrorist organization. Her ruling specifically allows for the removal of Venezuelan citizens aged 14 and older who are in the U.S. without legal status and are verified members of Tren de Aragua.
Haines concluded her ruling by stating, "Having done its job, the Court now leaves it to the Political Branches of the government, and ultimately to the people who elect those individuals, to decide whether the laws and those executing them continue to reflect their will."
In March, Trump issued a proclamation declaring the Tren de Aragua an invading force, justifying the expeditious deportation of individuals labeled as gang members. Following this declaration, the administration began deporting these individuals to a notorious prison in El Salvador, igniting a series of lawsuits across multiple states, including the one leading to Haines' ruling.
The case that prompted Haines' decision was initiated by a Venezuelan national who fled to the U.S. with his family in 2023, citing extortion threats in his home country. After being reported as a Tren de Aragua member—a claim he vigorously denies—he was arrested in February. Initially, Haines approved the case as a class action, temporarily blocking the administration from deporting migrants within her jurisdiction. However, she lifted this designation, allowing deportations to proceed provided individuals are given adequate notice in both English and Spanish and an opportunity to voice any objections.
In a separate case in Texas, a woman who fled Venezuela faced allegations of gang membership after arriving in the U.S. in 2023 and receiving temporary protected status. She was arrested in Ohio and is currently detained in El Paso. Senior U.S. District Judge David Briones expressed that she was likely to succeed on the merits of her case, thus temporarily preventing the administration from deporting her or others accused of being Tren de Aragua members.
The rulings by both Judges Haines and Briones highlight the controversial use of the Alien Enemies Act and raise critical questions about the due process rights of individuals facing deportation. As legal battles continue, the implications of these decisions will impact the administration's approach to immigration enforcement, particularly concerning individuals from Venezuela and their treatment under U.S. law.
