US Supreme Court Allows Trump Use of Wartime Powers for Deportations

US Supreme Court allows Trump to deport alleged gang members under wartime powers, but mandates due process for challenges. [Image via Reuters]

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for President Donald Trump to use a rarely-invoked wartime powers law to rapidly deport alleged gang members – for now.

A lower court had temporarily blocked the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador on 15 March, ruling that the actions under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act needed further scrutiny.

Trump has alleged that the migrants were members of the Tren de Aragua gang “conducting irregular warfare” against the US and could therefore be removed under the Act.

While the administration is claiming the ruling as a win, the justices mandated that deportees must be given a chance to challenge their removal.

“The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs,” the justices wrote in the unsigned decision on Monday.

“The only question is which court will resolve that challenge,” they wrote.

Monday’s ruling said the challenge – brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of five migrants – was raised improperly in a Washington DC court and not in Texas, where the migrants are confined.

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices in dissenting with the majority ruling.

In the dissent, they wrote that the administration’s “conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law”.

Trump called the ruling a “great day for justice in America”.

“The Supreme Court has upheld the Rule of Law in our Nation by allowing a President, whoever that may be, to be able to secure our Borders, and protect our families and our Country, itself,” he wrote on Truth Social.

The ACLU also claimed the rulingas “a huge victory”.

“We are disappointed that we will need to start the court process over again in a different venue but the critical point is that the Supreme Court said individuals must be given due process to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act,” lead ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt said in a statement to US media.

Also See: US Chief Justice Roberts Criticizes Trump’s Call to Impeach Judge

At least 137 people have been deported by the Trump administration under the Alien Enemies Act, a move widely condemned by rights groups.

The act, last used in World War Two, grants the US president sweeping powers to order the detention and deportation of natives or citizens of an “enemy” nation without following the usual processes.

It was passed as part of a series of laws in 1798 when the US believed it would enter a war with France.

The Trump administration says all the deportees are members of the Tren de Aragua gang. The powerful multi-national crime group, which Trump recently declared a foreign terrorist organisation, has been accused of sex trafficking, drug smuggling and murders both at home and in major US cities.

US immigration officials have said the detainees were “carefully vetted” and verified as gang members before being flown to El Salvador, under an agreement with that country.

But many of the deportees do not have US criminal records, a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official acknowledged in court documents.

Some relatives of the deported migrants have told the BBC the men have been wrongly swept up in the immigration crackdown, and that they are innocent.

Several other families have said they believe that deportees were mistakenly identified as gang members because of their tattoos.

Monday’s decision vacates an earlier ruling by federal judge James Boasberg, later upheld by a federal appeals court, which had temporarily blocked the use of the law to carry out the deportations.

Boasberg had dismissed the government’s response to his order as “woefully insufficient”. The White House had said the judge’s order itself was not lawful and was issued after two flights carrying the men had already left the US.

Rights groups and some legal experts have called the invocation of the Act unprecedented, arguing it has only previously been used after the US officially declared a war, which under the US constitution only Congress can do.

This news is sourced from BBC and is intended for informational purposes only.

News Desk

Your trusted source for insightful journalism. Stay informed with our compelling coverage of global affairs, business, technology, and more.

Recent

When Insurgents Rule: The Taliban’s Crisis of Governance

When Insurgents Rule: The Taliban’s Crisis of Governance

The Taliban’s confrontation with Pakistan reveals a deeper failure at the heart of their rule: an insurgent movement incapable of governing the state it conquered. Bound by rigid ideology and fractured by internal rivalries, the Taliban have turned their military victory into a political and economic collapse, exposing the limits of ruling through insurgent logic.

Read More »
The Great Unknotting: America’s Tech Break with China, and the Return of the American System

The Great Unknotting: America’s Tech Break with China, and the Return of the American System

As the U.S. unwinds decades of technological interdependence with China, a new industrial and strategic order is emerging. Through selective decoupling, focused on chips, AI, and critical supply chains, Washington aims to restore domestic manufacturing, secure data sovereignty, and revive the Hamiltonian vision of national self-reliance. This is not isolationism but a recalibration of globalization on America’s terms.

Read More »
Inside the Istanbul Talks: How Taliban Factionalism Killed a Peace Deal

Inside the Istanbul Talks: How Taliban Factionalism Killed a Peace Deal

The collapse of the Turkiye-hosted talks to address the TTP threat was not a diplomatic failure but a calculated act of sabotage from within the Taliban regime. Deep factional divides—between Kandahar, Kabul, and Khost blocs—turned mediation into chaos, as Kabul’s power players sought to use the TTP issue as leverage for U.S. re-engagement and financial relief. The episode exposed a regime too fractured and self-interested to act against terrorism or uphold sovereignty.

Read More »
The Indo-Afghan Arc: Rewriting Pakistan’s Strategic Geography

The Indo-Afghan Arc: Rewriting Pakistan’s Strategic Geography

The deepening India-Afghanistan engagement marks a new strategic era in South Asia. Beneath the façade of humanitarian cooperation lies a calculated effort to constrict Pakistan’s strategic space, from intelligence leverage and soft power projection to potential encirclement on both eastern and western fronts. Drawing from the insights of Iqbal and Khushhal Khan Khattak, this analysis argues that Pakistan must reclaim its strategic selfhood, strengthen regional diplomacy, and transform its western border from a vulnerability into a vision of regional connectivity and stability.

Read More »
Pakistan’s rejection of a Taliban proposal to include the TTP in Turkey talks reaffirmed its sovereignty and refusal to legitimize terrorism.

Legitimacy, Agency, and the Illusion of Mediation

The recent talks in Turkey, attended by Afghan representatives, exposed the delicate politics of legitimacy and agency in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. By rejecting the Taliban’s proposal to include the TTP, Pakistan safeguarded its sovereignty and avoided legitimizing a militant group as a political actor, preserving its authority and strategic narrative.

Read More »