Court Rules that People Targeted for Removal Under the Act are Entitled to Challenge their Deportation
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court tonight granted the Trump administration’s request to lift the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued in a case addressing President Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA), but underlined that people targeted for removal under the act are entitled to challenge their removal, including by challenging the interpretation and constitutionality of the act.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Democracy Forward, and the ACLU of the District of Columbia are litigating the case, which had halted President Trump’s use of the 1798 wartime act to bypass immigration law.
On March 26, a federal appeals court denied the administration’s request to lift the TRO that was issued earlier by a federal district court. The government then asked the Supreme Court to lift the TRO.
In its 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court agreed to lift the TRO, but explained that “the only question” on which its decision turned is which lower court could hear the challenge.
Because the current case was brought in the District of Columbia, instead of “the district of confinement,” the court found, on venue grounds, that the TRO should be dissolved.
The court took pains to underline that “detainees subject to removal orders under the AEA are entitled to notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal,” that “notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief,” and that they are “entitled to judicial review as to questions of interpretation and constitutionality of the Act.”
Justice Sotomayor wrote a dissent that Justices Kagan, Jackson, and (in significant part) Barrett joined, and Justice Jackson also wrote a separate dissent.
In their April 1 Supreme Court brief opposing the stay request, the ACLU and Democracy Forward noted “it is becoming increasingly clear that many (perhaps most) of the men” sent to El Salvador on March 15 were erroneously listed as gang members, largely because of their tattoos. The TRO “is thus essential to ensure that more individuals who have no affiliation with the gang will not be sent to a notorious foreign prison.”
The following is reaction to tonight’s Supreme Court action:
“The critical point of this ruling is that the Supreme Court said individuals must be given due process to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act. That is an important victory,” said Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead counsel.
“Today’s ruling affirms what we have long known: the Trump administration acted unlawfully when it removed people from this nation with no process. We will continue to use all legal tools to protect our clients and people across the nation from removal without due process,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward.
“No president is above the law. Trump’s attempt to twist a centuries-old wartime law to sidestep immigration protections is an outrageous and unlawful power grab—and it threatens the core civil liberties of everyone. The ACLU will keep fighting for due process protections for all,” said Scott Michelman, legal director of the ACLU of the District of Columbia.
The order is here.
Case background is online here.
