In a dramatic escalation of tensions between the executive and judicial branches, the Trump administration deported alleged members of a Venezuelan gang from the US despite a federal court order explicitly prohibiting such actions, according to Reuters.
The administration claims that the judge lacked the authority to block the deportations, sparking a heated debate over constitutional checks and balances and the limits of presidential power.
US District Judge James Boasberg issued an order on Saturday evening blocking the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport more than 200 alleged members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang linked to kidnapping, extortion, and contract killings.
The judge argued that the statute, which grants the president wartime powers to deport non-citizens, applies only to hostile acts by another country that are “commensurate to war.”
Despite the court order, the administration proceeded with the deportations, with White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stating that the judge had “no lawful basis” to intervene. She asserted that federal courts generally lack jurisdiction over the president’s conduct of foreign affairs and that the deportations were necessary to remove “foreign alien terrorists” from US soil.
Deportation operation, international reaction
The deportations were carried out swiftly, with flights departing from Texas and arriving in El Salvador. Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele shared footage on social media showing men being escorted off a plane under heavy security and mocked the court order.
The Trump administration claimed that some of the deportees had already been removed before the court order was issued, but it did not provide details on how many individuals were affected or whether any were deported after the order.
Patrick Eddington, a homeland security and civil liberties expert at the Cato Institute, described the administration’s defiance as “beyond the pale” and the most radical test of America’s system of checks and balances since the Civil War. Meanwhile, Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, emphasised that a federal court’s jurisdiction does not stop at US borders.
The question is whether the ‘defendants’ are subject to the court order, not ‘where’ the conduct being challenged takes place.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which challenged the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, has called on the government to ensure that no migrants were removed in violation of the court order. Lee Gelernt, lead ACLU attorney, expressed hope that the US would work with foreign governments to return any individuals deported after the order was issued.
The deportees were reportedly transferred to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Centre, a mega-prison capable of holding up to 40,000 inmates, where they could be detained for at least one year, with the possibility of renewal.
The standoff between the Trump administration and the judiciary is likely to have far-reaching implications for the balance of power in the US government. As legal challenges continue, the case could set a significant precedent for the limits of presidential authority and the role of the courts in overseeing executive actions.
