On March 15, 2025, President Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expedite the deportation of alleged members of the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua. This marked the first use of the act since World War II.
The Alien Enemies Act grants the president authority to detain and deport noncitizens from countries at war with the United States. Historically, it has been invoked during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II.
The administration’s proclamation labeled Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization, asserting that its members had unlawfully infiltrated the U.S. and were conducting hostile actions amounting to an invasion. This designation aimed to justify the use of the Alien Enemies Act to detain and remove individuals associated with the gang without standard legal proceedings.
However, within hours of the proclamation, U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order blocking the administration’s actions. Judge Boasberg’s order halted the deportation of all noncitizens subject to the proclamation for 14 days, citing potential irreparable harm if the deportations proceeded. He emphasized that the Alien Enemies Act pertains to hostile acts by nations equating to war, not non-military immigration issues.
The judge also ordered the immediate return of deportation flights already en route to Central America, including planes bound for El Salvador and Honduras. This decision underscored the urgency and gravity of the situation, reflecting concerns about the legality and humanitarian implications of the expedited deportations.
The administration’s move faced immediate legal challenges from organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Democracy Forward. These groups argued that the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime measure historically used only during declared wars and that its application in this context was unprecedented and potentially unlawful.
Critics contended that using the Alien Enemies Act to target non-state actors during peacetime represents an overreach of executive power. They expressed concerns that this approach could bypass due process protections and set a concerning precedent for the treatment of noncitizens.
Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized Judge Boasberg’s ruling, alleging it endangers public safety. The administration argued that the president possesses broad powers in matters of national security and that the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act was a necessary response to the threat posed by Tren de Aragua.
The case underscores ongoing tensions over immigration policies and the lawful scope of presidential powers. The forthcoming hearing, scheduled for March 21, 2025, will further address the legality of the administration’s actions and the appropriate application of the Alien Enemies Act in this context.
This development highlights the complex interplay between national security concerns and the protection of individual rights. As the legal proceedings continue, the outcome will likely have significant implications for the future use of wartime authorities in addressing non-state threats and the balance of powers between the executive branch and the judiciary.
