Trump administration defies court order on due process for deported Venezuelan migrants

• The Trump administration said it will not comply with a federal judge’s order requiring due process for 252 Venezuelan migrants deported to a high-security prison in El Salvador under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.
• In a Feb. 9 filing, the Justice Department argued it has no legal obligation to facilitate hearings for the deported migrants and rejected orders to return them to the U.S. or hold proceedings abroad.
• The deportations proceeded despite an emergency court order to halt them, triggering a legal fight that reached the Supreme Court, which upheld the government’s authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act but left due process questions unresolved.
• DOJ lawyers cited strained diplomatic relations, alleged gang ties, and political instability in Venezuela following the capture of Nicolás Maduro, arguing that hearings abroad are impractical and that courts lack jurisdiction outside the U.S.
• The administration maintains that actions under the Alien Enemies Act fall outside judicial review, a stance it also defended before an en banc Fifth Circuit panel, framing the deportations as part of a high-level national security mission.

The Trump administration has said it will not comply with a federal court order requiring due process for 252 Venezuelan migrants deported last year to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador.

In a new court filing on Feb. 9, the Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected an order issued by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg directing the government to “facilitate” due process for the migrants, who were deported in March 2025 under the rarely used 1798 Alien Enemies Act. The filing makes clear the administration believes it has no legal obligation to take further action on behalf of the deportees.

The Venezuelan migrants were flown to El Salvador despite an emergency order from Boasberg instructing the administration to halt the deportations and turn the aircraft around mid-flight. That move triggered an extended legal battle that eventually reached the Supreme Court in April 2025. The justices ruled in favor of the government’s authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, but left unresolved questions about due process for those already removed.

In December, Boasberg issued a follow-up order directing the government to either return the deported migrants to the United States for hearings or arrange constitutionally adequate proceedings abroad. The Justice Department rejected both options in its latest filing, arguing they are either legally impossible or pose unacceptable national security risks.

Government lawyers said returning the migrants is not feasible due to strained diplomatic relations with Venezuela and the alleged gang affiliations of the deportees. The filing also dismissed the possibility of holding hearings at U.S. facilities abroad, citing political instability following the recent U.S. operation that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in Caracas. The department further argued that U.S. courts lack jurisdiction to conduct habeas proceedings outside the country and that doing so would interfere with sensitive diplomatic efforts.

The administration’s position is that the migrants are not entitled to additional due process once removed and that decisions made under the Alien Enemies Act fall outside the proper scope of judicial review. Justice Department lawyers said they would immediately appeal any further injunction and seek an emergency stay from higher courts.

“If, over defendants’ vehement legal and practical objections, the Court issues an injunction, defendants intend to immediately appeal, and will seek a stay pending appeal from this Court (and, if necessary, from the D.C. Circuit),” the department said.

DOJ defends use of 1798 Alien Enemies Act in Fifth Circuit challenge

The Alien Enemies Act, enacted in 1798, allows the president to detain and remove citizens of a hostile nation during a declared war or under circumstances involving an invasion or predatory incursion – powers that have been used sparingly in U.S. history.

This act, according to BrightU.AI‘s Enoch, was a response to the French Revolution and the perceived threat of foreign influence, particularly from France, during the early years of the United States. It allowed for the internment of individuals deemed a threat to national security – a practice that has been used in various forms throughout American history, including during World War I and World War II.

In line with this, DOJ lawyers advanced similar arguments in January before an en banc 17-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which convened to consider the legality of the Trump administration’s use of the 227-year-old law.

The department argued at that time that a U.S. indictment against Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro “reinforces the Proclamation’s findings that the Maduro regime and TdA have formed a ‘hybrid criminal state’ directed by the regime” and said this justified invoking the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport the migrants to a third-country prison.

“These new developments underscore the Maduro Regime’s control over TdA and TdA’s violent invasion or predatory incursion on American soil. As a result, it is even clearer that the President’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act was part of a high-level national security mission that exists outside the realm of judicial interference.”

Watch the video below, where a Texas representative says immigration should be merit-based.

This video is from the NewsClips channel on Brighteon.com.

Sources include:

ZeroHedge.com

FoxNews.com

BrightU.ai

Brighteon.com