In mid-March, President Donald Trump Invoked almost unnecessary federal lawclaiming that it gives him the right to deport many immigrants with minimal or no legal process to determine that these deportations are legal. The text of the regulation, the Alien Enemy Act of 1798, Don’t give President Trump the power claimed.
At least for now, the subordinate order prevents Trump’s Foreign Enemy Act from being announced; the order is still in effect, although relevant litigation is underway Is the Trump Administration ignoring it The lower court ordered the planes transporting the immigrants to be reversed and dozens of Venezuelan immigrants were sent to a prison in El Salvador.
Now, Trump wants the Supreme Court to stop the lower court orders and effectively allow him to resume deportation without any meaningful review without having to prove that the immigrants he declared was actually doing something wrong. The case is called Trump v JGGin the courtShadow Summary,” a mixture of emergency motions and other matters, the Justice often decides after a rough review of the case. Decisions on the case may be held at any time in the coming weeks.
exist JGGTrump’s lawyer Propose three arguments After the merger, he will be given the power to remove any non-citizens from the United States.
First, Trump claims unprecedented power to invoke Alien enemy law In times of peace and against non-state actors – in this case, Tren de Araguaa criminal gang originated from Venezuela. This law does give the President the power to properly invoke foreign nationals, only during “war between the United States and any foreign country or government” or during a military “invasion or predatory invasion” in the United States.
Congress – the only department in which the government can declare war – has not yet declared a war against Venezuela, and the so-called civilian presence in the United States is not a military action. In addition, the Foreign Enemy Act only applies to military operations of “foreign or government”. Tren de Aragua is not his own country and does not control the Venezuelan government.
Second, Trump’s lawyer argues that immigration challenges his announcement Only lawsuits can be filed in Texas federal courtAccording to a legal process called a “habitat protection” procedure, it is usually only possible for one person to use the procedure to challenge his own detention.
What is important is that there are two reasons. The federal case filed by Texas appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, The far-right court This often interprets the law in a creative way to benefit the right-wing cause and the Republican Party, which could put anyone at a disadvantage in trying to prevent deportation. Furthermore, if only individuals can challenge it, it is no longer possible to obtain extensive court orders to block his entire declaration.
Third, even if the immigrants Trump targets can convince the Fifth Tour to protect them from deportation, they are unlikely to have a chance. As Justice Patricia Millett, one of four lower court judges JGG The case explains that the administration’s position is that once Trump’s announcement takes effect, Immediately Resume removal flight Without the need to provide notice from the plaintiff, please be aware of their removal or any opportunity to call a lawyer, let alone a writ of habeas corpus or any review of their legal challenges to dismissal. ”
If the court is to accept the third argument, Trump will be able to expel people so quickly that it is too late to do anything about it when the lawyer or judge learns that they are being deported.
Trump’s citation of the Alien Enemy Act is illegal during peacetime
The Alien Enemy Act has been cited only three times in American history: During the War of 1812 and during the World Wars. In these three circumstances, Congress formally declared war.
Even during other wars, the president may be reluctant to use this power, because the authority provided by the Alien Enemy Act is very harsh. After correct call, the law allows the federal government to arrest, detain and dismiss office.All locals, citizens, residents or subjects of hostile states or governmentsages 14 and older, they will be in the United States instead of naturalization. “So, in the declared war with Germany, the president can order almost all German citizens to evacuate from the United States, regardless of whether those German nationals take any aggressive or criminal proceedings.
Trump now claims that he can use the law in peacetime to target alleged members of Tren de Aragua.
Even if the fact that the Foreign Enemy Act only applies to foreign countries or governments – and neither Tren de Aragua seems to have no legal authority to support Trump’s claim that the law can be used with foreign gangs engaged in ordinary criminal activities.
The Trump administration claimed in a summary with the Justice that Tren de Aragua’s alleged presence in the United States constitutes “Predatory invasion”, according to the Foreign Enemy Act. [1945年審判法院裁決 這引用了約翰·泰勒（John Tyler）總統（1841年成為總統）使用“掠奪性入侵”一詞，指的是墨西哥與當時德克薩斯州重視之間的戰爭期間的軍事襲擊。
因此，這一1945年的意見不支持對和平時期平民可以犯下“掠奪性入侵”的比例。而且，無論如何，值得注意的是，特朗普的律師可能會提出的唯一法律資料是由一名低級法官提出的80年的決定。
這 JGG 原告的簡介相比之下，眾多創始時代詞典和其他歷史文件的引用專門用於軍事突襲，包括喬治·華盛頓致托馬斯·杰斐遜的一封信，其中使用“掠奪性入侵”來指代英國對弗吉尼亞州美國軍事用品的突襲。
換句話說，特朗普的宣告依賴於對《外星敵人法》的一種全新的解釋，儘管法律的文本說了什麼，但它認為它可以在和平時期使用。在200多年的美國法律曆史上，他的律師沒有得到任何新解釋的支持。
特朗普裁定司法審查的嘗試也是無所不能的
也許意識到其對《外國敵人法》的解釋是前所未有的，特朗普政府花了大部分 JGG 簡要提出了對下級法院命令的程序異議，阻止了特朗普的宣告，尤其是其聲稱只有在德克薩斯州的人身保護程序中才能挑戰這一宣言。
人身保護程序通常必須在持有囚犯的管轄範圍內提出。特朗普政府監禁 JGG 德克薩斯州的原告，因此聲稱必須將其訴訟帶到德克薩斯聯邦法院。
但是，人身保護程序是聯邦監獄中某人挑戰其拘留的一種方式（通常是唯一的方法）。和原告 JGG 不要挑戰政府拘留他們的能力，而對他們的有效撤離案件的收益。他們只是挑戰了特朗普政府在《外國敵人法案》中未經正當程序而無效的企圖將其驅逐出境的企圖。最高法院裁定，當原告不挑戰其拘留時，人身習慣不是正確的補救措施。
正如法院在 Skinner訴Switzer （2011年），沒有案件“法院將人身保護是唯一的補救措施，甚至是可用的救濟，救濟都不會'[e] Guardianship, Accelerat[e] The date of release from custody has not been reduced in the future[e] Level of monitoring. ‘”
The decision means Trump is trying to challenge his declarations to the individual’s legal proceedings, in which individuals filing these lawsuits can be deported before they can even speak with their attorneys. If one of them JGG Plaintiffs also want to challenge their detention, a case that may need to be filed in Texas, but the Trump administration’s attempt to block the broader challenge declared to the Foreign Enemy Act cannot be compared with the Supreme Court’s precedent.
Furthermore, a different federal immigration law cuts Trump’s claim that single-person protection lawsuits must be adopted to challenge immigration declared by the Foreign Enemy Act. The Immigration and Nationality Act usually provides that it lists the The only exclusive program Used to determine whether it is possible to… delete from the United States. ”
Furthermore, the law grants immigrants a variety of procedural rights, such as the right to claim asylum. It does allow expedited lawsuits against certain immigrants, including those who commit serious felony crimes, but even those who are non-citizens Right to notify and hear Before they are removed from the country. The law weakens the argument that the government can deport it immediately.
Of course, any legal analysis of any Supreme Court case involving Trump must bring warnings. This is the court for the summer ruling Trump can use the president’s power to commit crimestherefore, there is no guarantee that these justices will comply with existing laws.
However, as far as we know, the law is clear that Trump cannot use the Alien Enemy Act to cut off due process for immigration in peacetime.
