Federal Appeals Court Halts Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act for Deportation of Venezuelan Gang Members

In a significant development, a three-judge panel of the Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals has decided that President Trump cannot utilize the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expedite deportations of individuals accused by his administration of being members of a Venezuelan gang. This decision marks a setback for the administration’s efforts, which are expected to culminate in a final showdown at the US Supreme Court.

The court agreed with immigration rights lawyers and lower court judges who contended that the Act was not intended for use against gangs such as Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan group targeted by Trump in his March declaration.

Lee Gelernt, representing the ACLU, commented on Tuesday, stating, “The administration’s use of a wartime statute during peacetime to regulate immigration was rightly blocked by the court. This is a pivotal decision that reins in the administration’s view that it can declare an emergency without any judicial oversight.”

The administration had deported individuals classified as Tren de Aragua members to a notorious prison in El Salvador, arguing that US courts could not order their release. However, in a deal announced in July, over 250 of the deported migrants returned to Venezuela.

The Alien Enemies Act has been invoked only three times prior in US history, all during declared wars – the War of 1812 and both World Wars. The Trump administration unsuccessfully argued that courts cannot challenge the president’s determination that Tren de Aragua was linked to Venezuela’s government and posed a threat to the United States, necessitating the use of the Act.

In a 2-1 ruling, the judges granted the preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs because they “found no invasion or predatory incursion” in this case. The majority decision was penned by US Circuit Judges Leslie Southwick, appointed by George W. Bush, and Irma Carrillo Ramirez, appointed by Joe Biden. Andrew Oldham, a Trump appointee, dissented.

The majority opinion stated that the president’s allegations about Tren de Aragua do not meet the historical levels of national conflict that Congress intended for the Act.

In a lengthy dissent, Oldham criticized his colleagues for second-guessing the president’s foreign affairs conduct, a realm where courts typically show great deference to the president.

“The majority’s approach to this case is not only unprecedented—it is contrary to over 200 years of precedent,” Oldham wrote.

The panel did offer the Trump administration one legal victory, ruling that the procedures used by the administration to inform detainees under the Alien Enemies Act of their legal rights are appropriate.

The decision can be appealed to the full Fifth Circuit or directly to the US Supreme Court, which is likely to make the final decision on the matter.