WASHINGTON (AP) – In a passionate dissent, Justice Samuel Alito expressed deep frustration with the seven-member majority, stating that the Supreme Court had acted “literally in the middle of the night” and without sufficient justification in halting the Trump administration from deporting any Venezuelans detained in northern Texas under a wartime law from the 18th century.
There was “dubious factual support” for approving the ACLU’s emergency appeal, which Alito and fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas echoed. The organization said that under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, immigration officials seemed to be preparing to resume these removals.
The court previously stated that deportations could only take place after those who were going to be removed had an opportunity to present their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals. However, the majority did not give a thorough explanation in the order issued early Saturday, as is customary.
Hours after the court intervened against Republican President Donald Trump’s administration, Alito said in his dissent that “both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law.”
The government was instructed by the judges’ short ruling to hold off on releasing Venezuelans detained at the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”
Alito said that the relief was provided in a “unprecedented,” “hasty,” and “premature” manner.
He said that the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction was uncertain at this stage due to the fact that lower courts had not exhausted all possible legal alternatives and the justices had not heard the government’s position.
The Court examined only the representations of the petitioners. Regarding the factual claims made by the petitioners or any of the legal problems raised by the application, the Court had not requested nor received a response from the Government. Additionally, the Court lacked the advantage of a Government response submitted to any of the subordinate courts, according to Alito.
“While alleging that the applicants were in imminent danger of removal, the legal filings provided little concrete support for that allegation,” according to Alito. “A government lawyer in another matter told a U.S. District Court in a hearing Friday evening that no such deportations were then planned to occur either Friday or Saturday,” he said, noting that the court did not receive direct testimony from the government about any intended deportations under the Alien Enemies Act in this matter.
The Court granted unprecedented and legally dubious relief in the early hours, Alito stated, “with questionable factual basis for its order, without allowing the lower courts to adjudicate, without input from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, and without offering any rationale for its order.” We had no solid evidence that an order at midnight was required or suitable in the given situation, thus I declined to join the Court’s ruling. The judiciary and the executive branch are both required to abide by the law.
In documents, the government is pleading with the high court to reevaluate its stay.
Lawyers for the men began a frantic legal battle to stop their deportation on Friday, but two federal courts declined to intervene. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also declined to impose an injunction preventing the inmates from being deported early on Saturday and Sunday.
The American Civil Liberties Union had previously used the Alien Enemies Act to sue for the protection of two Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet facility and to get a restraining order against the deportation of any more immigrants from the region.
The ACLU said in the emergency petition early Friday that Trump would utilize the statute against other Venezuelan males detained there because they were being accused by immigration officials of being Tren de Aragua gang members.
Only three times in American history has it been used, most recently to internment camps for Japanese-American citizens during World War II. Regardless of their immigration status, the government argues it provides them the authority to quickly deport foreigners they have identified as gang members.
Federal courts in Colorado, New York, and southern Texas swiftly issued orders prohibiting the transfer of prisoners under the legislation until the government offers a procedure for them to present claims in court, in response to the unanimous high court judgment on April 9.
However, no such order had been issued in the region of Texas that includes Bluebonnet, which is located in the state’s extreme northern region, 24 miles north of Abilene.
Trump has utilized the statute to send some Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are being held in the country’s infamous main jail.