In a high-stakes legal showdown, the Trump administration has formally asked the Supreme Court to intervene after lower courts temporarily blocked its effort to deport Venezuelan nationals—some allegedly tied to the violent South American gang Tren de Aragua—under a rarely used wartime immigration law dating back to 1798.
At the heart of the dispute lies the Alien Enemies Act, a law passed in the 18th century allowing the U.S. government to detain or deport nationals from countries with which it is at war. Though originally conceived for periods of declared war, the Trump administration has invoked it as a tool to expedite removals in the name of national security, citing mounting evidence of organized criminal infiltration from Venezuela. But its sudden application in a modern, peacetime context has drawn immediate legal scrutiny.
BREAKING: The Trump administration asks the Supreme Court to step in to Alien Enemies Act dispute and allow deportation pic.twitter.com/fsQZGUhYfj
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) March 28, 2025
Earlier this week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a blow to the administration’s strategy, upholding a lower court’s temporary restraining order (TRO) that halts deportations under the law for 14 days. The narrow 2-1 decision focused heavily on due process protections, underscoring concerns that individuals could be deported before courts have time to assess the legality of their removal, or their potential ties to criminal networks.
Judge Karen Henderson, a George W. Bush appointee, acknowledged the administration’s urgency but sided with her more liberal colleague, Judge Patricia Millett, in affirming the TRO. Henderson stressed that the plaintiffs faced potential exile to countries not their own, while Millett emphasized the irreversible legal damage that could result from hasty deportations—removing individuals beyond reach of counsel or judicial oversight.
In response, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris warned the Supreme Court that the circuit court’s “flawed” decision risked damaging sensitive foreign negotiations and undercutting presidential authority in matters of national security. The administration’s filing urged the high court to not only review the case but to grant an immediate administrative stay, allowing deportations to resume while the court deliberates.
The stakes are political as much as legal. At a time when border enforcement remains a central campaign issue, the administration is framing the courts’ resistance as an obstruction to executive power and national safety.
“This is an unauthorized infringement on the president’s authority,” declared White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, promising swift action to restore control over immigration policy and, in her words, “Make America Safe Again.”
President Trump has full authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act. The court has no jurisdiction to block the President’s actions taken both pursuant to that act and under his Commander-in-chief powers. pic.twitter.com/bBQfisZh0z
— Eric Schmitt (@Eric_Schmitt) March 27, 2025
The Supreme Court’s response—likely to come swiftly—could mark a turning point in how ancient statutes are wielded in modern immigration battles, and whether the executive branch can use emergency powers to circumvent standard due process in the name of national security.
