The Supreme Court has issued a temporary order to halt the deportation of Venezuelans detained at the Bluebonnet Detention Center in northern Texas, acting on an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
The court’s decision, which restricts removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, comes at a time when immigration authorities appeared to be preparing to restart deportations.
In the brief order released on Saturday, the Supreme Court directed the Trump administration not to remove any Venezuelans from custody “until further order of this court.”
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito expressed dissenting opinions regarding the ruling.
ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt commented on the ruling, expressing relief that the deportations have been temporarily blocked, noting that individuals may have faced the dire prospect of indefinite confinement in dangerous Salvadoran prisons without due process.
In related legal developments, two federal judges refused requests to intervene on Friday, despite acknowledging the potential issues raised by lawyers seeking to protect their clients from deportation.
This followed a decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to deny protective orders for detainees facing removal.
The administration plans to quickly approach the Supreme Court again to seek the lifting of this temporary order.
The ACLU’s actions first aimed to stop the deportation of two specific Venezuelans detained at Bluebonnet, expanding their legal fight to encompass all immigrants in the region who may be affected under the Alien Enemies Act.
In an emergency filing, the ACLU highlighted that immigration authorities had accused detained Venezuelan men of ties to the Tren de Aragua gang, which could make them targets for expedited removal under President Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.
Historically, this act has been utilized only three times in U.S. history, with its most recent application occurring during World War II when Japanese-American civilians were placed in internment camps.
The Trump administration has maintained that the law allows them to rapidly remove individuals identified as gang members, irrespective of their immigration status.
Following a unanimous Supreme Court decision on April 9, judges in Colorado, New York, and southern Texas promptly issued orders to withhold removals under the Alien Enemies Act until affected individuals are given due process to contest their removals in court.
However, no such ruling had been applied in the northern Texas jurisdiction associated with the Bluebonnet facility, situated roughly 24 miles north of Abilene.
U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, appointed by Trump, recently chose not to grant a ban on the deportation of the two Venezuelans named in the ACLU lawsuit, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) provided assurances that immediate deportations would not occur.
Judge Hendrix also declined to implement a wider prohibition against the removal of all Venezuelans within the region, reasoning that deportations had not yet commenced.
In its emergency Friday filing, the ACLU cited sworn declarations from several immigration attorneys who reported that their clients at Bluebonnet had received indications that they were classified as members of Tren de Aragua and could be facing deportation.
One attorney highlighted that her client had been urged to sign documents in English, despite only being fluent in Spanish.
Furthermore, the client was informed by ICE that the deportation order originated from the President, expressing that he would be removed regardless of his signature on the documents.
During a hearing on Friday evening before District Judge James E. Boasberg in Washington, D.C., Gelernt argued that after the administration shifted Venezuelan detainees to a different immigration facility to avoid prior bans on deportations, actions were being taken to expedite removals.
Witnesses had reported that men were being loaded onto buses for transfer to an airport on that same Friday night.
Since Judge Hendrix did not acquiesce to the ACLU’s request for an emergency hold on deportations, the organization turned to Judge Boasberg.
Boasberg had previously halted deportations earlier in March, but expressed limited jurisdiction to act due to the Supreme Court ruling indicating that only judges in the appropriate jurisdictions could impose orders against deportation.
“I’m sympathetic to everything you’re saying,” Boasberg told Gelernt.
Nevertheless, he stated he lacked the authority to intervene.
Earlier this week, Boasberg determined there was probable cause to believe the Trump administration violated his prior order to ban deportations, crafting concerns around ICE’s communication breakdown regarding individuals’ rights to contest their removal.
Drew Ensign, an attorney for the Justice Department, countered that individuals slated for deportation would have at least 24 hours to challenge their removal.
While he indicated that no flights were scheduled for late Friday night, the Department of Homeland Security retained the option to proceed with removals that weekend.
ICE refrained from commenting on ongoing litigation.
Additionally, a judge in Massachusetts has upheld a permanent ban on the administration’s ability to deport individuals who have completed their appeals to countries other than their own, unless they are thoroughly informed about their destination and given an opportunity to contest potential risks of torture or death.
image source from：https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/aclu-claims-administration-restarting-deportations-18th-century-wartime-120957485
