The U.S. Supreme Court has stepped in to halt the Trump administration’s bold move to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members.
The BBC reported that the court’s order, issued on April 19, 2025, pauses the removal of detainees held in Texas. This decision underscores the ongoing clash between robust immigration enforcement and legal protections for detainees.
President Donald Trump, since taking office in January 2025, has prioritized cracking down on foreign gangs. His administration invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, accusing them of ties to the Tren de Aragua gang.
The Alien Enemies Act, rarely used, was last invoked during World War II for the internment of Japanese descent individuals. Trump’s use of this law marks only its fourth application, all during times of conflict. The administration claims the Venezuelan gang poses a significant threat, justifying such extraordinary measures.
A lower court first intervened on March 15, 2025, temporarily blocking the deportations. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit, arguing that the detained Venezuelans were not given a fair chance to contest their removal.
The ACLU highlighted that some detainees received deportation notices in English, despite not speaking the language.
The ACLU’s lawsuit further claimed the detainees were unaware of their right to challenge the deportation in court. This lack of due process sparked significant legal scrutiny.
The Supreme Court, on April 8, 2025, ruled that while Trump could use the Alien Enemies Act, deportees must have an opportunity to challenge their removal.
By April 8, 2025, 261 Venezuelans had already been deported to El Salvador, with 137 under the Alien Enemies Act. The Supreme Court’s latest order on April 19, 2025, reinforces the need for procedural fairness. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, signaling a divide on the court.
In his second inaugural address in January 2025, Trump vowed to “eliminate the presence of all foreign gangs” on U.S. soil. He accused the Tren de Aragua gang of threatening an “invasion” of American territory. This rhetoric has fueled his administration’s aggressive immigration policies, which have faced multiple legal challenges.
The White House remains defiant, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defending the deportations. “We are confident in the lawfulness of the administration’s actions,” Leavitt said, dismissing the ACLU’s lawsuit as “meritless litigation” by “radical activists.” The administration insists its measures protect American citizens from foreign criminal networks.
The ACLU, however, warned of dire consequences without court intervention. “Dozens or hundreds of proposed class members may be removed to a possible life sentence in El Salvador,” the lawsuit stated. The organization emphasized the need for detainees to have a fair shot at contesting their deportation.
A separate case has drawn attention to potential errors in the deportation process. Kilmar Ábrego García, an El Salvador national, was deported despite never being convicted of a crime. The government labeled him an MS-13 gang member, a claim his lawyer and family vehemently deny.
Senator Chris Van Hollen visited Ábrego García in El Salvador, noting he was moved from the notorious Cecot mega-jail to another prison.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government must facilitate Ábrego García’s return. This ruling highlights the risks of hasty deportations without thorough vetting.
The Trump administration, however, remains unyielding on Ábrego García’s case. “Never” will he live in the U.S. again, the administration declared. This stance reflects the hard-line approach that has defined Trump’s immigration policy since January 2025.
The Supreme Court’s intervention signals a commitment to balancing national security with individual rights. While Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act aims to swiftly remove perceived threats, the court insists on due process. This tension has defined the legal battles over the Venezuelan deportations.