On Saturday, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Trump administration deportations of Venezuelans held in northern Texas under a rarely used 18th-century law. The Court’s ruling prevents federal authorities from proceeding with removals from the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”
The emergency order followed a last-minute appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which raised alarm over the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a centuries-old wartime statute.
The ACLU argued that the administration was attempting to bypass normal immigration procedures by applying the outdated law, which allows the U.S. to detain or deport nationals of enemy countries during wartime.
The Supreme Court’s decision halts deportations for now, giving the justices time to consider the broader legal implications. However, the ruling was not unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, indicating a split within the Court over whether the Trump administration has the legal authority to act under the Alien Enemies Act.
So far, two lower court judges declined to intervene, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has yet to issue a ruling on the matter.
The Trump administration has justified its actions by claiming that many of the Venezuelan detainees are affiliated with Tren de Aragua, a violent transnational criminal gang that has been expanding in Latin America and increasingly in the U.S.
According to the administration, the use of the Alien Enemies Act enables immigration officials to swiftly deport individuals they deem a threat, regardless of their current immigration status or asylum claims.
Historically, the Alien Enemies Act has only been used three times in American history. Its most infamous use came during World War II, when Japanese-American citizens and residents were forcibly relocated and detained in internment camps.
Critics warn that reviving such an archaic law to fast-track deportations risks undermining due process protections and setting a dangerous precedent. The Supreme Court’s temporary halt now shifts the spotlight to future legal proceedings that will determine whether the administration’s actions are constitutional—or whether the use of the Alien Enemies Act in this context goes too far.