In the complex arena of American politics and law, a long – awaited decision has finally emerged, casting a spotlight on the Trump administration’s controversial use of the Alien Enemies Act. For months, a flurry of legal activity, mountains of documents, and countless hours of hearings surrounded the question of whether this century – old law could be applied to alleged gang members. And until Thursday, no judge had directly addressed this pivotal issue.
U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr., a Trump appointee in the Southern District of Texas, stepped into the fray with a ruling that sent shockwaves through the political and legal landscapes. The Alien Enemies Act, a statute originally designed to be invoked when a “foreign nation or government” initiates an “invasion or predatory incursion” into the United States, had been stretched and contorted by the Trump administration. They argued that the Venezuelan government, through the alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang, was “invading” the U.S. But Judge Rodriguez saw through this argument, declaring in his ruling that the administration’s actions had far exceeded the scope of the law.
“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,” Rodriguez wrote. His words were a clear rebuke, concluding that the Executive Branch could not rely on the AEA, based on the proclamation, to detain or remove the named petitioners and the certified class.
The Alien Enemies Act, a relic from a bygone era, had only been invoked three times in American history: during the War of 1812 and the two World Wars. The Trump administration’s attempt to use it in this new context was shrouded in secrecy and haste. They aimed to expel Venezuelan detainees quickly, hoping to evade judicial scrutiny. As a result, much of the legal battles up to this point had been fought in an emergency posture, focused on blocking the expulsions rather than delving into the legality of the administration’s use of the law itself.
The case that led to Judge Rodriguez’s ruling had its roots in an earlier emergency lawsuit filed by the ACLU. On the fateful morning of March 15, as the Trump administration prepared to use the 18th – century wartime power to send over 100 Venezuelans to a detention camp in El Salvador, the ACLU sprang into action. Trump had secretly signed a proclamation invoking the act, which only came into the public eye later that day. Despite a federal D.C. judge’s efforts to halt the operation, three planes carrying the detainees took off from Texas.
The legal saga continued to unfold, with the Supreme Court ruling that future challenges to the AEA had to be filed as habeas corpus claims. This nullified the ACLU’s initial D.C. suit, leading them to file a new habeas corpus class – action lawsuit in the Southern District of Texas on behalf of some of the original Venezuelans.
On Thursday, Judge Rodriguez firmly dismissed the administration’s claim that courts had no right to question the president’s power to invoke the AEA. “Construing the language of the AEA does not require courts to adjudicate the wisdom of the President’s foreign policy and national security decisions,” he wrote. He also sided with the detainees’ lawyers, stating that even if the detainees were gang members (a claim many of them vehemently denied), their presence did not justify the use of the law. “As for the activities of the Venezuelan – directed TdA in the United States, and as described in the Proclamation, the Court concludes that they do not fall within the plain, ordinary meaning of ‘invasion’ or ‘predatory incursion’ for purposes of the AEA,” he added.
This ruling is just one chapter in a series of lawsuits across the country, all aimed at blocking the administration’s attempts to use the Alien Enemies Act to remove Venezuelans. In a recent case, the administration was accused of moving detainees out of the Southern District of Texas, where a preliminary injunction had barred removals, to the Northern District of Texas. The Supreme Court’s rare, rapid – fire middle – of – the – night intervention managed to stop this maneuver, but it left the fundamental question of the president’s authority unanswered. Now, with Judge Rodriguez’s ruling, the nation waits to see how this legal battle will continue to shape the future of immigration policy and the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches.
