Trump Administration Deports Hundreds of Migrants Despite Judicial Ruling

The Trump administration deported hundreds of migrants to El Salvador despite a federal judge’s order halting such actions. Flights were ongoing when the order was issued, raising legal concerns regarding the use of the Alien Enemies Act. The ACLU and Venezuelan officials criticized the deportations, arguing they violated constitutional protections.

The Trump administration proceeded to deport hundreds of migrants to El Salvador, despite a federal judge’s order prohibiting such actions. This decision occurred during ongoing flights with migrants on board when U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order related to the deportations. Two planes were already en route, one towards El Salvador and the other to Honduras, prompting the judge to verbally instruct them to return, although this directive was not included in the formal order.

President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador acknowledged the situation in a post on the social media platform X, expressing the sentiment that the deportations had already taken place. Bukele had previously agreed to host around 300 migrants in his country’s prisons for a financial compensation of $6 million. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also commented, indicating that over 250 alleged members of a Venezuelan gang had been sent to El Salvador, which he described as a beneficial arrangement for U.S. taxpayers.

The deportations were conducted under the framework of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law historically applied in wartime contexts. This act empowers a president to detain or expel foreign nationals perceived as enemies during times of war. It is notable that its prior applications were during significant conflicts, including World Wars I and II.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which initiated the lawsuit resulting in Boasberg’s court order, is now investigating whether the government’s actions constituted a violation of this order. ACLU lead attorney Lee Gelernt expressed concerns and is awaiting further assurances from the government regarding compliance with the court’s ruling.

In a statement, the Venezuelan government criticized the invoking of the Alien Enemies Act, likening it to historical injustices. The gang, Tren de Aragua, has been tied to a mass migration of Venezuelans fleeing economic turmoil in their homeland. Claims surrounding the gang’s influence have been utilized politically to frame certain communities negatively.

The Trump administration did not specify which individuals were deported or provide evidence of their alleged gang membership, raising questions about due process and the protection of their rights. Reports indicated that deported individuals included members of other notorious gangs, such as MS-13.

Footage released by the Salvadoran government illustrated the harsh treatment of deportees, depicting them shackled and escorted by armed guards upon arrival at airports. These deportees were transferred to a high-security facility known for its stringent enforcement measures against crime.

Legal representatives highlighted the alarming implications of the deportations, noting the fear that any Venezuelan national in the U.S. could be erroneously accused of gang affiliation. The legal challenges aimed at halting these deportations initially focused on five individuals but were broadened to encompass a larger group of potential deportees.

Judge Boasberg has temporarily halted deportations for a maximum of 14 days during which the migrants will remain in federal custody. A further hearing is scheduled, as the judge emphasized the importance of allowing the potentially affected migrants to contest their deportation in court. He remarked, “Once they’re out of the country, there’s little I could do.”

The Trump administration’s decision to deport hundreds of migrants to El Salvador, despite a judge’s ruling against it, raises significant legal and ethical questions. The application of the Alien Enemies Act has sparked controversy, necessitating court intervention. Ongoing investigations and litigation highlight concerns about due process and the potential misuse of presidential power in addressing immigration issues. The upcoming court hearings will be pivotal in determining the future of these deportations and the rights of the affected individuals.

Original Source: apnews.com