Judge in Alien Enemies Act Case Presses DOJ on Deportations Amid Controversy
Washington, D.C. – A federal judge challenged a Justice Department lawyer Monday over the Trump administration’s noncompliance with his order to temporarily halt deportations under an 18th-century law. The legal battle focuses on the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport individuals it claims are affiliated with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.
During the tense hearing, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg sharply questioned the administration’s stance on his Saturday order, characterizing its response as, “we don’t care, we’ll do what we want.” Boasberg had directed any planes in the air carrying deportees to return to the U.S., yet the government had failed to fully comply.
Justice Department attorney Abhishek Kambli defended the administration’s actions, asserting that compliance was based on the written order rather than the oral ruling issued during an emergency hearing. He maintained, “We believe that we’ve complied with the order.” However, Boasberg dismissed this argument, stating, “An order is an order.”
Key Questions About Deportation Flights
Boasberg pressed Kambli on critical details surrounding the deportation flights—such as the number of flights and how many deportees were in the air. Kambli refused to provide specifics, citing national security concerns.
“I am only authorized to say what we have said in court filings,” Kambli stated. The Justice Department’s filing argued that plaintiffs “cannot use these proceedings to interfere with the President’s national-security and foreign-affairs authority.”
In response, Boasberg ordered the DOJ to provide answers by noon Tuesday and to submit an explanation outlining why it was unable to disclose certain details during Monday’s hearing.
“If the government takes the position that it will not provide that information to the Court under any circumstances, it must support such position, including with classified authorities if necessary,” Boasberg ruled. He also issued a formal written order following the hearing, adding, “since apparently my oral orders don’t appear to carry much weight.”
Legal Battle Over Presidential Powers
The Justice Department later sought to remove Boasberg from the case, arguing that his inquiries endangered national security. A letter to a federal appeals court asserted that answering the judge’s questions without sufficient briefing posed grave risks to governmental operations.
The case revolves around the Alien Enemies Act, which allows the president to swiftly deport immigrants from hostile nations during times of war or invasion. This law, rarely invoked since World War II, is now at the center of legal controversy.
Implications for Immigration and Judicial Authority
Boasberg convened the hearing to establish the timeline of events since his Saturday evening order blocking deportations of Tren de Aragua members. He had instructed DOJ attorneys to ensure compliance, emphasizing that deportees covered by the ruling should be returned to the U.S.
However, a government filing on Sunday revealed that some deportations had already been carried out before Boasberg’s ruling.
Broader Public Reaction and Context
Legal analysts and advocacy groups have weighed in on the case, noting its broader implications for presidential authority, judicial oversight, and due process.
Meanwhile, the debate over national security policies and individual rights remains highly contentious, similar to discussions surrounding regulated industries such as the vape market, where brands like Geek Bar, Raz Vape, and Lost Mary Vape continue to evolve amid shifting policies and consumer trends.
As the court battle continues, all eyes are on the Friday hearing, where Boasberg will address the government’s response and determine next steps in this high-stakes legal dispute.
