The U.S. Supreme Court issued a significant order early Saturday morning, directing the Trump administration to temporarily suspend the deportations of numerous alleged Venezuelan gang members. Immigration advocates have raised concerns that these individuals were at an imminent risk of being forcibly removed from the country. The court's order explicitly states, “The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.” This brief, unsigned emergency order did not provide an explanation for the Supreme Court's decision.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented from the ruling, with Alito indicating that he would provide a more comprehensive statement regarding his disagreement later on. The Trump administration had been preparing to deport these Venezuelan men under the Alien Enemies Act, prompting the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to seek an urgent intervention from the courts to halt the removals.
In a statement released early Saturday, ACLU’s lead counsel, Lee Gelernt, expressed relief that the Supreme Court had intervened to prevent the administration from swiftly deporting the individuals, “the way others were just last month.” However, the ultimate fate of the detainees targeted for deportation remains uncertain. Attorneys representing the migrants sought intervention from federal judges in Texas, Washington, and the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, arguing that the government had not afforded those targeted a fair opportunity to contest their deportation.
The ACLU emphasized the urgency of the situation, noting that several migrants at a detention center in North Texas had received written notices of removal in recent days. Some individuals were reportedly informed to prepare for travel as early as Friday. Their attorneys conveyed to the justices that many had already been loaded onto buses, presumably en route to the airport, and were told they could be deported as soon as Friday afternoon or Saturday morning. Without a court order to block these removals, dozens or even hundreds of targeted individuals might face deportation to El Salvador, potentially leading to a “life sentence” without a real opportunity to contest their removal.
The notices received by the migrants were written only in English and stated that the recipients were “determined to be an Alien Enemy.” These notices provided minimal information, only mentioning that the recipients could “make a phone call,” without detailing when deportation would occur or outlining the process for contesting their removal. Gelernt highlighted the lack of clarity, stating, “There’s no box to check to say I want to contest,” during a hastily arranged federal court hearing.
During the court proceedings, a Justice Department lawyer, Drew Ensign, asserted that the government had no immediate plans to deport the targeted migrants but reserved the right to proceed as soon as Saturday. Ensign maintained that officials were only required to provide 24 hours’ notice to the individuals and were not obligated to inform them about their rights to contest deportation decisions.
Aziz Z. Huq, a constitutional law scholar at the University of Chicago, cautioned against overinterpreting the Supreme Court's interim order. He noted that while the order paused deportations, it did not address the core legal issues regarding Trump’s authority to utilize the wartime powers statute for deporting alleged gang members. However, Huq emphasized that the court's decision aligns with its previous messages about the necessity for due process and adherence to court orders during deportation processes.
The Trump administration's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely used wartime statute, has become a focal point in a legal standoff between the administration and the judiciary. Earlier this year, the administration deported over 130 Venezuelans under this act. Subsequent flights carrying migrants to El Salvador have occurred, but none were under the wartime authority.
In earlier rulings, the Supreme Court affirmed that while the Trump administration could deport migrants under the Alien Enemies Act, it must first allow detainees the opportunity to contest their removals. This ruling triggered a flurry of legal activity across federal courts as immigration advocates sought to identify targeted migrants and file individual cases on their behalf.
During a court hearing on Friday, Judge James E. Boasberg referred to the notices received by detainees as “very troubling,” expressing doubts about their compliance with Supreme Court directives. However, he ultimately determined that he lacked jurisdiction to intervene, leaving the matter to the 5th Circuit and the Supreme Court.
The legal landscape surrounding the deportation of Venezuelan gang members remains complex and fluid. With the Supreme Court's emergency order temporarily halting deportations, the ACLU and other advocates continue to fight for the rights of those targeted. As legal challenges progress, the implications of the Trump administration's actions and the courts’ responses will likely shape the future of immigration policy and enforcement in the United States.
