BREAKING: Supreme Court Green Lights Deportations Under Alien Enemies Act

In a sharply divided 5–4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has vacated federal Judge James Boasberg’s injunctions that barred the Trump administration from deporting certain migrants under the Alien Enemies Act (AEA)—a rarely used 1798 law. The decision clears a path for the administration to proceed with removals, specifically targeting Venezuelan nationals over the age of 14 alleged to be affiliated with the Tren de Aragua, a criminal organization with transnational ties.

I am working around the clock to make sure you are the first to know when news breaks. Please consider supporting my work by becoming a paid subscriber today:

The Court's majority did not issue a full endorsement of the administration’s policies. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that non-citizens detained under the AEA still have a right to challenge their deportations, albeit in a different judicial venue. The Court's decision rested primarily on venue, finding that Judge Boasberg had overreached by issuing a nationwide bar without properly establishing jurisdiction.

“Detainees subject to removal orders under the AEA are entitled to an opportunity to challenge their removal. The only question is which court will resolve that challenge.”

This leaves intact a crucial safeguard: those affected must receive "reasonable notice" and access to judicial review, even if that review takes place in a different court than originally sought.

One of the dissents, penned by Justice Sonia Sotomayor and joined by Justices Kagan, Jackson, and Coney Barrett (in part), took a far more critical tone, warning that the ruling could open the door to unchecked executive power under an archaic statute originally designed for wartime use.

“The Government’s conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law,” Sotomayor wrote. “That a majority of this Court now rewards the Government for its behavior with discretionary equitable relief is indefensible. We, as a Nation and a court of law, should be better than this.”

Sotomayor’s dissent called into question not only the legal reasoning behind the use of the Alien Enemies Act but also the political motivations.

The majority, while allowing the administration to proceed, implicitly rejected Stephen Miller’s broader interpretation of the law as a tool for bypassing standard immigration protections. Instead, the Court drew a narrow path forward, maintaining that due process cannot be suspended even under the AEA.

But for now, the Trump Administration can move forward with these controversial deportations under this wartime law.

Read the full opinion here.