Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States.
In a surprising turn of events early Saturday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a temporary stay on President Donald Trump’s plans to deport Venezuelan nationals, invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (AEA). This act, a relic from a bygone era, is now at the center of a contemporary legal battle.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), often labeled as “far-left” by critics, has brought forth a case currently under scrutiny by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The ACLU’s involvement was spurred by reports that illegal aliens were being hastily transported for deportation. In a bid to halt these actions, the ACLU sought an emergency injunction from the Supreme Court.
While the Fifth Circuit deliberates, the Supreme Court delivered an unsigned order favoring the ACLU’s request, effectively pausing the deportation of numerous Venezuelans held at the Bluebonnet Detention Center in Texas.
The ACLU’s petition, representing two Venezuelan detainees—identified as A.A.R.P. and W.M.M.—argues that the government’s actions breach a recent Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. J.G.G. (April 7, 2025). This ruling mandated that detainees must be adequately informed about their rights and given an opportunity to contest their removal under the AEA.
In their argument, the plaintiffs assert that the administration’s expedited approach denies detainees proper notification, as they were provided notices solely in English and were not informed of their right to seek judicial review.
Moreover, allegations surfaced claiming that some detainees were wrongfully labeled as gang members, a conclusion drawn from tattoos and their social media presence.
According to the court filing:
“On April 18, 2025, the district court denied the proposed class’s application for a temporary restraining order to stay their removal under the AEA, primarily based on the government’s assurance that it wouldn’t seek to remove the named class members, A.A.R.P. and W.M.M., while their habeas petition remains active.
However, following this district court’s order, counsel for the applicants learned that several Venezuelan nationals in custody had received removal notices under the AEA, with government officials indicating that deportations could commence as soon as that very afternoon.
The ACLU further contends that “class members received removal notices in English only, lacking crucial information on how long they have to contest their deportation or the process involved. Officers informed class members last night that they could be removed within a mere 24 hours, leading to concerns that individuals were already being herded onto buses.”
While the Supreme Court did not outright grant or deny the detainees’ attorneys’ application, it effectively froze the case, impacting those currently held in the Northern District of Texas, as reported by NBC.
Notably, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito issued a strong dissent against the majority’s decision.
According to the official order:
“The Court is presented with an application from a proposed class of detainees seeking an injunction against their removal under the Alien Enemies Act. This matter is currently pending before the Fifth Circuit Court. Upon the Fifth Circuit’s action, the Solicitor General is invited to respond to the application before this Court promptly.
The Government is hereby directed not to remove any member of this proposed class from the United States until further notice from this Court.” Justice Thomas and Justice Alito dissent from this order, with a statement from Justice Alito forthcoming.
President Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 aims to expedite the deportation of alleged members of the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua (TdA), which he has labeled a Foreign Terrorist Organization. He argues that this group engages in “irregular warfare” against the U.S., involving crimes such as kidnappings and narcotics trafficking in collaboration with the Maduro regime.
Trump justifies his use of the AEA to detain and deport Venezuelan citizens over the age of 14 identified as TdA members, claiming it allows him to bypass standard immigration procedures. This raises a pressing question: why should individuals who entered the country without following due process now be afforded the same rights as citizens?
This story has been updated with additional information.
