On Tuesday, the Trump government asked a Federal Court of Appeal to block the order of a lower court in which the Trump government is dedicated to offer the correct process to dozens of Venezuelan immigrants who were deported to El Salvador in March under a wartime law.
The emergency request by the Ministry of JusticeSubmitted to the US Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia, the day before the government was supposed to send the Lower Court Judge to send its proposal to allow nearly 140 of the deported Venezuelans to challenge their removal. The men, accused of being a member of a violent street gang called the Aragua, are held in a Salvadoran prison of maximum security.
The White House deported the men on a series of flights on 15 March, with the help of a powerful 18th-century status that is known as the Alien Enemies Act. That law, which has only been used in American history three times, is intended to be used in times of declared war or during an invasion by a foreign nation.
The fight for the Venezuelans is just one of the many bitter fights that courts have moved throughout the country against an administration that aggressively tries to deport as many immigrants as possible by methods that have repeatedly stretched the limits of the law. Time and again, judges have arranged themselves on a similar bottom line, Say that the immigrants must receive fundamental procedural rights Before being driven out of the country.
The procedure for judge James E. Boasberg, the chief judge in the federal court in Washington, was one of the first deportation cases that reached the courts and remains one of the most difficult fought. The judge tried to stop the deportation flights that the Venezuelans did shortly after they left, but the administration continued, As a result of which he threatens Trump officials with contempt procedures.
Since the men landed in El Salvador, their lawyers have sought another order to bring them back to the United States. And last week Judge Boasberg gave them something they wanted, Trump officials lead in an indignant decision To give the men the appropriate process, they were denied, but left it to the administration to offer a first plan about how he can implement his instructions.
Instead of doing this by their deadline on Wednesday, lawyers from the Ministry of Justice asked both the Court of Appeal and Judge Boasberg to put everything on hold when they challenged his underlying instructions. They claimed that he missed the jurisdiction to tell the US government what to do with men in the detention of a foreign nation, and said his original order was involved in the removal of the president by removing dangerous criminal alien beings from the United States. “
The Supreme Court has already weighed the case, Regulation at the beginning of April That the Venezuelan men had to have the chance to dispute their deportations, but only at the place where they were held and only through a legal process known as a Writ van Habeas Corpus. A Habeas writer enables the defendants to get out of custody and go to court to challenge their detention.
But the decision of the Supreme Court raised a crucial question: who has custody of the Venezuelan men according to the law?
Their lawyers claimed that the Trump government is known as ‘constructive detention’ about them because they were held in El Salvador under an agreement between the White House and Nayib Bukele, the Salvadoran president.
The Ministry of Justice did not agree and claimed that the men were in the only custody of El Salvador and were therefore published outside the reach of orders by an American federal judges.
In his order last week, Judge Boasberg chose the side of the department and said that he could not fully refute the claims of the administration, even while he expressed skepticism that the claims were true. Nevertheless, he used another reason to order the White House to come up with a way to give the Venezuelans a way to seek help, and said the Constitution demanded that they received a sort of appropriate process.
It was that reason with which the Ministry of Justice lodged at the Court of Appeal to put the case on hold. Lawyers for the Department have attacked it as “unprecedented, unprecedented, unfounded and constitutional offensive.”
“The ever -fantastic orders of the court continue to threaten serious damage to the interests of the government and the interests of the government and Foreign Affairs,” the lawyers wrote.
The case for Judge Boasberg took place as A related case unfolded in a separate federal court This has been taken into account whether President Trump used the Alien Enemies Act in the first place. That case is planned to have an oral argument in New Orleans at the end of the month.
- Advertisement -
