President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act against members of Tren de Aragua, claiming they threaten the U.S. However, this unprecedented move faced immediate legal challenges from the ACLU, leading to a restraining order halting deportations of affected Venezuelans. Critics argue it oversteps legal boundaries, citing the lack of a formal war declaration.
On Saturday, President Trump signed a proclamation aimed at cracking down on members of the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua (TdA). The order mandates the apprehension and removal of Venezuelan nationals associated with TdA, which the proclamation labels a “designated Foreign Terrorist Organization” involved in “invasion” and “irregular warfare” activities within the United States.
In the proclamation, Trump asserted that evidence supports claims that TdA has invaded and continues to threaten the United States, mentioning alleged crimes such as kidnappings, extortion, and drug trafficking. This invocation is based on the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA), marking the first instance in modern times that a president has used this act without a formal declaration of war.
Legal experts emphasize that the AEA has only been invoked in limited historical contexts, primarily during wartime against enemy nationals. The statute empowers the president to detain and deport individuals from countries identified as enemies amid aggression. However, critics argue that Trump’s actions lack legal grounding since the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela or the TdA, which is not an official nation.
In response to the proclamation, the ACLU and Democracy Forward Foundation promptly filed a lawsuit asserting the illegality of the AEA’s use in peacetime. The lawsuit protects five Venezuelan individuals, who fear deportation to countries where they face persecution, highlighting alleged violations of statutory laws and constitutional rights.
Chief Judge James Boasberg temporarily halted the removal of certain Venezuelans during a hearing, enforcing a two-week restraining order against immigration officials from enforcing the AEA due to the ongoing lawsuit. Critics have labeled the proclamation as a major overreach designed to circumvent existing immigration regulations. Attorney Arthur Spitzer from the ACLU expressed concerns about the legality of Trump’s actions, stating there is no military justification for invoking the AEA against TdA.
The recent invocation of the Alien Enemies Act by President Trump represents a significant legal challenge amid claims against Venezuelan nationals affiliated with Tren de Aragua. Legal challenges have emerged quickly, highlighting concerns over constitutional violations and the legality of broad deportation measures in peacetime. The temporary restraining order imposed by the court illustrates the ongoing debates surrounding immigration policy and presidential powers.
Original Source: www.jurist.org
