Former President Donald Trump scored a significant legal victory on Monday as the Supreme Court ruled in favor of his administration’s use of a centuries-old law to deport certain undocumented migrants.
In a narrow 5-4 decision, the court upheld the Trump administration’s authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport individuals identified as members of criminal organizations. The case centered on alleged Venezuelan gang members, particularly those linked to the Tren de Aragua gang, whom Trump had previously designated as terrorists.
The ruling follows a high-profile operation led by Trump’s border security advisor, Tom Homan, which resulted in the arrest of dozens of suspected gang affiliates across the U.S. last month. However, those deportations were halted on March 15, when U.S. District Judge James Boasberg—an Obama appointee—issued an injunction blocking the removals.
That injunction has now been lifted following the Supreme Court’s decision, paving the way for the resumption of deportations under the administration’s crackdown on transnational gang activity.
Trump celebrated the outcome on his Truth Social platform, calling it a “GREAT DAY FOR JUSTICE IN AMERICA.”
“The Supreme Court has upheld the Rule of Law in our Nation by allowing a President, whoever that may be, to secure our Borders and protect our families and our Country, itself,” Trump wrote.
The ruling marks a notable expansion in presidential authority on immigration enforcement, particularly during times of perceived national threat.
Attorney General Pamela Bondi hailed the court’s decision on Monday as “a landmark victory for the rule of law,” and criticized Judge Boasberg as an activist who overstepped his authority.
“The Department of Justice will continue fighting in court to make America safe again,” she stated in a social media post.
Last month, former President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act in an effort to expedite the deportation of alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang—a law most notably used during World War II to intern Japanese, Italian, and German immigrants.
Trump asserted that the gang was “conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States” with the aim of destabilizing the nation.
Judge Boasberg, however, rejected that justification, ruling that the Alien Enemies Act “does not provide a basis for the president’s proclamation,” arguing that terms like “invasion” and “predatory incursion” traditionally refer to nation-state acts of war.
Boasberg also said his immediate order was necessary, as the government was already deporting migrants designated under Trump’s proclamation to a notorious prison in El Salvador—the Terrorism Confinement Center.
The Trump administration countered that by the time Boasberg issued his written order, the deportation flights had already left U.S. airspace and were therefore not subject to recall.
Justice Department attorneys downplayed the legal authority of Boasberg’s verbal directive, contending that it did not require planes to turn back.
In court documents urging the Supreme Court to overturn Judge James Boasberg’s order, the Trump administration argued that the temporary ban infringed on the president’s constitutional authority to make national security decisions.
According to Fox News, the administration claimed Boasberg had obstructed President Trump’s immigration agenda, including his ability “to protect the Nation against foreign terrorist organizations” and avoid jeopardizing sensitive foreign negotiations.
“This case presents fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national security-related operations in this country—the President, through Article II, or the Judiciary, through [temporary restraining orders],” Justice Department lawyers wrote in a March 28 application to Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees emergency litigation from the D.C. Circuit. “The Constitution supplies a clear answer: the President. The republic cannot afford a different choice.”
Opposing the application were a group of Venezuelan men held in U.S. immigration custody. They argued that lifting Boasberg’s injunction would expose them to “extraordinary and irreparable harms”—including deportation to a notorious Salvadoran prison, where they risk indefinite detention without due process, NBC News reported.
Family members have denied the plaintiffs’ alleged gang affiliations. One detainee, a Venezuelan professional soccer player and youth coach, was reportedly misidentified as a gang member based on a tattoo of a crown meant to honor his favorite team, Real Madrid.
In its ruling on Monday, the Supreme Court did not address the legitimacy of the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act—an 18th-century law—to justify the deportations.
“The plaintiffs challenge the government’s interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those arguments,” the majority wrote.
Instead, the Court held that any legal challenges to deportations under the Act must be filed in the federal court district where detainees are held—meaning Texas, not Washington, D.C., is the proper venue.
The justices also imposed procedural safeguards, ruling that detainees must receive timely notice of their designation under the Act. This notice must be given in a manner that allows them to pursue habeas corpus relief in the appropriate jurisdiction before removal occurs.
The decision was not unanimous. Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the Court’s three liberal justices dissented. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the majority for granting the government “extraordinary relief” without addressing the potential “grave harm” the plaintiffs face or the administration’s efforts to “subvert the judicial process throughout this litigation.”
Critics argue that Trump’s reliance on the Alien Enemies Act exceeds his authority, as the law applies only during times of declared war or invasion. It permits the president to detain, restrict, or deport individuals whose primary allegiance is to a foreign power and who pose a national security threat during wartime.
Amid the legal battle, Trump called for Judge Boasberg’s impeachment—prompting a rare public rebuke from Chief Justice Roberts. Boasberg, who was confirmed by the Senate in 2011 by a 96–0 vote, was labeled by Trump on social media as a “Radical Left Lunatic” and “troublemaker and agitator.”
Meanwhile, Boasberg is considering contempt proceedings against administration officials who allegedly defied his order by deporting the plaintiffs to El Salvador. A preliminary injunction hearing in the case is scheduled for Tuesday.
