Washington, D.C. – In a narrow 5–4 decision Monday evening, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration may continue using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport migrants deemed national security threats—at least temporarily.
The ruling grants President Donald Trump authority to enforce a controversial executive order issued last month that cited the presence of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang as justification for emergency deportations. The decision overturns multiple temporary restraining orders issued by lower courts, which had blocked the administration from using the act.
Though the ruling represents a short-term legal victory for Trump, it is not a final judgment on the legality or constitutionality of his executive order. The justices affirmed the right of affected migrants to challenge deportations in court, ensuring ongoing legal scrutiny as lower courts continue to hear the case.
Trump’s order, issued in mid-March, described TdA’s alleged infiltration into the U.S. as an “invasion”, allowing his administration to invoke the Alien Enemies Act—a centuries-old law originally designed to authorize wartime detention or expulsion of foreign nationals deemed dangerous.
In the weeks that followed, the administration deported hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador, where they were sent to a high-security prison notorious for inhumane conditions. Immigrant rights organizations and legal advocates have condemned the deportations, arguing they violate due process and amount to collective punishment without individual assessments.
Legal and Human Rights Concerns
Immigrant rights groups immediately challenged the executive order, leading to TROs issued by federal judges who cited due process violations and insufficient evidence linking deportees to gang activity. The Supreme Court’s ruling allows the deportations to proceed pending full adjudication in lower courts.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Court’s decision enables the government to “sidestep constitutional protections that have long applied to non-citizens on U.S. soil,” warning it could set a dangerous precedent.
Legal experts say the case raises fundamental questions about the scope of executive power and the applicability of 18th-century national security statutes in modern immigration policy.
Broader Implications
The administration’s reliance on the Alien Enemies Act—previously unused in immigration enforcement for over a century—marks a dramatic escalation in Trump’s second-term approach to migration. The White House maintains the law is essential for national security, particularly as Trump prepares for further executive actions targeting foreign nationals from “hostile regimes.”
With federal courts still weighing the legality of the executive order, Monday’s Supreme Court decision is likely to intensify the legal and political battle over the future of U.S. immigration enforcement in an election year.
