Appeals court won’t halt order barring Donald Trump administration from deportations under wartime law – The Times of India

A federal appeals court on Wednesday refused to lift an order barring US President Donald Trump’s administration from deporting Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a rarely invoked wartime law.
In a 2-1 decision, the US court of appeals for the district of Columbia circuit refused to overturn a March 15 order that temporarily blocks deportations under the controversial law. The administration had justified the expulsions by labeling the Tren de Aragua gang an “invading force” under a presidential proclamation.
The justice department appealed after US district judge James Boasberg blocked further deportations and ordered that planeloads of Venezuelan migrants already removed be returned to the US. However, the administration did not comply with that order.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed the lawsuit on behalf of five Venezuelan migrants detained in Texas, arguing that the government’s actions violated due process.
The case has deepened tensions between the White House and the federal judiciary, particularly as Boasberg’s decision challenges the administration’s broad use of executive authority in immigration enforcement.
Court split on ruling
Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Patricia Millett sided against lifting the order, with each writing separate concurring opinions. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented.
Millett, an Obama-era nominee, defended Boasberg’s decision, emphasising that the ruling simply preserves the current situation while critical legal questions are examined in the upcoming hearing.
“There is neither jurisdiction nor reason for this court to interfere at this very preliminary stage or to allow the government to singlehandedly moot the plaintiffs’ claims by immediately removing them beyond the reach of their lawyers or the court,” Millett wrote.
Henderson, a nominee of President George H W Bush, added that the ruling does not prevent the administration from detaining migrants but ensures they are not sent to a country they have no ties to.
“Lifting the injunctions risks exiling plaintiffs to a land that is not their country of origin,” she wrote. “Indeed, at oral argument before this Court, the government in no uncertain terms conveyed that—were the injunction lifted—it would immediately begin deporting plaintiffs without notice.”
In dissent, Walker argued that the lawsuit belongs in Texas, where the plaintiffs are detained, and warned that blocking deportations could harm sensitive foreign policy negotiations.
“The government has also shown that the district court’s orders threaten irreparable harm to delicate negotiations with foreign powers on matters concerning national security,” he said.
Administration faces scrutiny
Judge Boasberg, chief of the federal district court in Washington, has indicated he will determine whether the administration defied his order by proceeding with deportations. The White House has cited “state secrets privilege” to withhold further details on the matter.
Trump and his allies have intensified their attacks on Boasberg, with some calling for his impeachment. However, in a rare statement, chief justice John Roberts defended judicial independence, asserting that “impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”
The Alien Enemies Act, which allows for deportations without a court hearing, has not been used since World War II. Boasberg ruled that migrants must have an opportunity to challenge their alleged gang affiliations before being removed, arguing there is a “strong public interest in preventing the mistaken deportation of people based on categories they have no right to challenge.”
The ruling marks a significant legal hurdle for the Trump administration’s immigration policies, adding another layer of complexity to the debate over executive power and due process rights for noncitizens.