A federal judge on Thursday has permanently excluded the Trump government to call on the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century war law in wartime, to deport Venezuelans, as criminals from the southern district of Texas, and said that the use of the statute of the White House was illegal.
The decision of the judge, Fernando Rodriguez Jr., was the most extensive statement to date by one of the many lawyers who currently hear challenges for the efforts of the White House to evoke the powerful but rarely as part of the diverse deportation plans.
The 36 -page statement By judge Rodriguez, a president Trump arrived, a philosophical rejection of the Witte Huis attempts to transposle the Alien Enemies Act, which was assumed in 1798 when the budding United States were threatened by war with France, in the context of today’s immigration policy.
The Supreme Court has already said that all Venezuelans who want to expel the White House under the proclamation of Mr Trump who calls on the law must have the chance to challenge their removal. But the ruling of Judge Rodriguez continued and said that the White House had wrongly stretched the meaning of the law, which is supposed to be used only against members of a hostile foreign nation in times of declared war or during a military invasion.
Although the decision of Judge Rodriguez only applied to Venezuelan immigrants in the southern district of Texas – including cities such as Houston, Brownsville and Laredo – it can have an effect, if not binding, on some of the other cases where the administration is used in the use of the Alien Enemies Act.
“The court concludes that according to the law, the executive cannot rely on the AEA, on the basis of the proclamation, to hold the submitters and the certified class, or to remove them from the country,” wrote Judge Rodriguez.
He also discovered that the ‘simple ordinary significance’ of the Language of Law, such as ‘invasion’ and ‘predatory raid’, referred to an attack by ‘military forces’ and did not rely in line with Mr Trump’s claims about the activities of Tren de Aragua, a pric lamation in a proclamation in the alien and the meatlamation in the alien and the alien and the meatie and the meatlamation, and the Alien andem’s.
The American Civil Liberties Union has so far submitted at least eight lawsuits that have challenged the statute in Texas, New York, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Washington and Georgia. Federal judges in six of those cases have given preliminary orders that prevent the government from using Venezuelans accused of trining the Aragua to belong to a prison in El Salvador.
Lee Gelern, the main lawyer of the ACLU in the cases, praised the ruling by Judge Rodriguez.
“This decision rightly acknowledged that the president cannot easily explain that there is an invasion and a convocation of an authority in wartime during peace time,” said Mr. Gerern. “As the court recognized, the congress never intended this law in this way.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a message that was looking for comment.
Early in his decision, Judge Rodriguez rejected an argument from the Ministry of Justice that he was missing the authority to even consider the use of the law by the White House, which was used only three times in American history: during the war of 1812 and during the World Wars I and II.
Department lawyers have consistently maintained that even judges have no authority to penetrate the president’s decisions into foreign policy cases. And while judge Rodriguez acknowledged that the Alien Enemies Act gives the president ‘broad powers’, he also said that judges still have the opportunity to determine whether presidents correctly used the law.
“The court reserves the authority to interpret the conditions of the AEA and to determine whether the announced basis for the proclamation evokes the status correctly,” he wrote.
In particular, the court, however, rejected the authority to investigate the truth of Mr Trump’s underlying statements, including his claim that Tren is controlled by the Venezuelan government – a one claim that American intelligence services do not agree. The judge said that because such assessments were the political branches to determine, he had to accept Mr. Trump’s findings at nominal value.
Nevertheless, Judge Rodriguez has established that Mr Trump did not mean the use of the law with the definitions of important terms in the law. For example, he rejected the president’s claims that the arrival of large numbers of Tren could be interpreted to the United States as an invasion or what the action mentions as a ‘predatory raid’.
“In the significant majority of archives, the use of ‘invasion’ and ‘predatory raids’ to an attack by military armed forces,” Judge Rodriguez, adds that those terms “involve an organized, armed force that enter the United States to deal with the behavior of ownership and human area.”
Judge Rodriguez, 56, was the first Latino Mr. Trump nominated as the federal bank during his first term. He was a partner at the powerful law firm Baker Botts in Houston and worked for years in Latin -America with International Justice Mission, an evangelical Christian group that fights against human trafficking.
The order of Judge Rodriguez applies to a class of claimants. This means that, unless Thursday’s ruling is destroyed on appeal, the government will be excluded from holding or removing someone from his district with the help of Mr. Trump of the Alien Enemies Act.
Although the ACLU has been largely successful to prevent the Trump administration from continuing to deport people under the law, it has not yet been able to return the first party of nearly 140 Venezuelans who were removed to El Salvador on 15 March to the United States.
Those men remain in custody of prisoners in a notorious prison known as the terrorism restriction center or Cecot.
Last week, lawyers from the American Civil’s Liberties Union Judge James E. Boasberg, the chief judge in the federal court in Washington, order the administration to bring those men back to the American soil So they could get the appropriate process that they would have received if they were not in a hurry out of the country.
When trying to convince Judge Boasberg that he had the authority to tell the White House to bring the men back, the lawyers quoted a ruling from the Supreme Court in the case of another immigrant deported to El Salvador, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.
In that decision, the judges said that the White House had to “facilitate” the release of Salvadoran custody of Mr Abrego Garcia, who repeatedly admitted that Trump has admitted that he was wrongly sent to El Salvador on the same group of three aircraft that transported the Venezuelan men.
The Ministry of Justice filed against the ACLU request at the end of Thursday on Thursday at the end of Thursday to bring the men back from El Salvador.
- Advertisement -