Trump-appointed federal judge rejects use of Alien Enemies Act in Venezuelan deportations

WASHINGTON — A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump on Thursday rejected the Trump administration’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelans it alleges are members of the criminal organization Tren de Aragua.

U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr., of the Southern District of Texas,wrote in an opinion thathe does not question the executive branch’s authority to direct the detention and removal of aliens who engage in criminal activity, and he noted the administration can continue to rely on the Immigration and Nationality Act for those proceedings.

But Rodriguez, who was nominated in Trump’s first term, wrote that the question at the center of the lawsuit was whether Trump could use the Alien Enemies Act to detain and remove Venezuelans who were members of Tren de Aragua, and he argued that “the historical record renders clear that the President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”

The Supreme Court hadput a pause on deportationsunder the Alien Enemies Act at a time whenbuses with Venezuelans were headed to an airportfrom a detention center in the Northern District of Texas. Some of those on the bus said they were told they were destined for a prison in El Salvador, while others were told they were headed to Venezuela, according to the wife of one of the detainees and two lawyers representing other detainees at the facility.

Until Trump invoked it this year, the Alien Enemies Act was only invoked during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II. Trump, in a proclamation on March 15, declared that Tren de Aragua was a designated terrorist organization that was “perpetuating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.”

Rodriguez wrote in his 36-page opinion that the Trump administration’s use of “invasion” does not match the historical use of the term, which has typically been used in connection with military endeavors or warfare. The court found that an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” must be “an organized, armed force entering the United States to engage in conduct destructive of property and human life in a specific geographical area” but that “need not be a precursor to actual war.”

Rodriguez alsogranteda petition for a class status, writing that the “special circumstances of this case” allowed for that remedy because the suit involved “common questions of law that may prove dispositive as to all Venezuelan aliens in the Southern District of Texas.”

In afinal judgment and permanent injunction, Rodriguez wrote that the administration was permanently enjoined from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport, transfer or remove the plaintiffs and other members of the class, but wrote that they were not prohibited from “proceeding with removal proceedings or otherwise acting” based on the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The ACLU’s Lee Gelernt, the lead lawyer representing the plaintiffs, noted this was the first time that a federal judge had issued a summary judgment and weighed in on the merits of whether the Trump administration could use the Alien Enemies Act during peacetime at all.

“The Court correctly held that the President lacks authority to simply declare there’s been an invasion of the United States and then invoke a 18thcentury wartime authority during peacetime,” Gelernt said. “Congress never meant for this law to be used in this manner.”