Salvador police officers sued members of Venezuelan gangster Tren de Aragua, who were recently deported by the US government and imprisoned in the Centre of Terror Confinement (CECOT) prison, and this trick image was obtained on March 16th, 2025 as part of an agreement with El Salvador Tecolca, as part of an agreement with the Salvador government.
Secretaria de Prensa de la presidencia | Via Reuters
The Supreme Court on Monday abandoned the orders of a federal judges who blocked the removal of suspects of Venezuelan gang Tren Aragua without legal proceedings under the alien enemy law.
A 5-4 decision by the High Court essentially clears the path to resuming deportation under rarely used wartime laws, as long as detainees are given legitimate procedures. This means they must be given time to challenge their detention and allow the regime to prove the legality of their confinement.
“AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they will be removed under the law. Notices must be provided within a reasonable time in such a way that allows them to actually seek habeas and protection at the appropriate venue before such removal is made,” the court wrote.
The decision lifts an order issued by Washington-based US District Judge James, who blocked the move on March 15th, while the lawsuit continues. The original lawsuit was filed by five Venezuelans, and Boasberg tentatively proved it as a class action lawsuit applied to all Venezuelans in US detention who are not US citizens.
So far, Boasberg has only issued temporary restraining orders. He also decided whether to impose a long-term interim injunction with a hearing scheduled for Tuesday.
On Monday, March 13, 2023, James Boasberg, the incoming judge of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, USA.
Valerie Plesch | Bloomberg | Getty Images
In dissent, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson spoke about the historical nature of Monday’s ruling before Boasberg held a hearing on the provisional injunction in the matter.
“I lament that the court appears to have embarked on a new era of procedural fluctuations, and that it did so in such a casual, unfair, and in my view, inappropriate manner,” Jackson wrote.
“Of the most important awards happening in the shadow of our emergency facilities, today’s courts leave more and more traces. But there is no mistake. We are just as wrong as the past, and have equally devastating consequences.
The government previously indicated in court that if Boasberg’s order is lifted, it will immediately begin deportation. On March 26, the federal court of appeals voted 2-1 to reject the previous request to block Boasberg’s decision.
The rapidly moving incident concerns Trump’s aggressive and unprecedented use of power, accompanied by the nation calling for an 18th-century law called the Alien Enemy Law, which has been used during the war.
“The case presents basic questions about those who will decide how to carry out sensitive national security-related businesses in this country,” deputy Attorney General Sarah Harris wrote in her request. “The Constitution provides a clear answer: President.”
The Trump administration announced in February that it had determined that Tren de Aragua was a terrorist organisation and that its members had infiltrated the United States. In a contested move, the administration has said the group is effectively the arm of the Venezuelan government led by President Nicolas Maduro.
Trump then invoked the alien enemy law. This can only be used if there is a “predatory invasion.”
By making these discoveries, the Trump administration concluded that members of Tren de Aragua could be immediately detained and deported without the opportunity to determine whether the alien enemy has applied or whether the people involved are even members of the gang. The plaintiff’s lawyers say the government’s point-based method of identifying whether people are members depends in part on whether they have tattoos and in some cases non-gang members are being targeted.
The administration argued that alien enemy laws give the president almost free power to eliminate designated immigrants in a short period of time despite constitutional protections of legitimate procedures.
Therefore, the key question in this case is whether the courts have a role to play in assessing whether the law is legally applied.
The government argues that the only way detainees can challenge potential deportation is to file another habeas corps in the jurisdiction in which they are held.
The Venezuelan plaintiffs argued in their own submission that the meaning of the government’s argument is “superficial” as officials can target immigrant groups on a whim.
The government’s decision will allow the government to immediately begin to foam up the blow-up of others who unilaterally declare themselves members of criminal gangs into brutal foreign prisons,” they said.
They also said Boasberg’s decision does not require the release of immigrants currently in detention or prevent deportation under different legal authorities. In fact, the Trump administration continues to expel other immigrants to El Salvador.
Boasberg’s intervention prompted a barrage of hostile commentary from Trump and his allies, calling for the president and others to bounce each of the longtime jurists. It prompted a quick responsibility from Secretary John Roberts.
Concerns have also been raised in court whether the administration violated an oral order from Boasburg. Two flights then landed in Honduras and El Salvador.
Until Trump’s announcement, alien enemy laws were only invoked during the three major wars: the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II.
