A federal judge has temporarily blocked former President Donald Trump’s efforts to deport thousands of Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act. This decision halts Trump’s plan to remove illegal immigrants with suspected criminal ties, setting up a legal battle over executive authority on immigration.
Key Facts:
- Chief Judge James E. Boasberg, an Obama appointee, issued a 14-day restraining order halting deportations.
- The lawsuit, J.G.G. v. Trump, was filed by far-left groups, including the ACLU and Democracy Forward.
- Trump planned to use the Alien Enemies Act to expedite deportations without lengthy court proceedings.
- A remote hearing is scheduled today, with an in-person hearing set for Monday in Washington, D.C.
- The administration had reportedly planned to send gang members and other criminals to Guantanamo Bay.
The Rest of The Story:
The legal battle over Trump’s immigration enforcement strategy intensified after Judge Boasberg issued a temporary order blocking deportations.
The ruling came in response to a lawsuit arguing that the Alien Enemies Act, historically used in wartime, should not be applied in peacetime to remove illegal immigrants.
For now, the decision only affects the plaintiffs named in the lawsuit, but it sets a precedent that could derail broader deportation efforts.
If the courts extend the injunction, it could prevent the fast-tracking of removals and keep criminal aliens on U.S. soil for months or even years.
The case now moves toward further hearings that could shape immigration policy moving forward.
These federal district court judges aren’t even trying to hide their bias
They’ve abandoned all pretense of objectivity
Judge James Boasberg ruled without even hearing a response from the DOJ
h/t @amuse pic.twitter.com/EdQBfFIGGQ
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 15, 2025
Commentary:
Once again, a left-wing judge is obstructing a president’s constitutional authority to enforce immigration law.
The Alien Enemies Act has been on the books since 1798 and has been used in previous crises.
The law explicitly grants the president power to remove foreign nationals deemed threats to national security.
There is no legal basis for blocking Trump’s plan, but activists and their judicial allies are doing everything possible to keep illegal immigrants in the country.
This ruling is part of a broader pattern where activist judges intervene in policy decisions that should rest with the executive branch.
Immigration enforcement is not supposed to be dictated by political activists in robes.
If left unchecked, this decision will send a dangerous message: that courts, not elected leaders, control America’s borders.
The left’s opposition to Trump’s immigration policies is nothing new, but what is alarming is how they consistently weaponize the courts to override executive authority.
Trump’s plan would have prioritized the removal of criminals and gang members—yet the ACLU and its allies seem more concerned with protecting those who pose a threat to public safety than safeguarding American citizens.
This decision is unlikely to hold up on appeal.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the president’s broad authority over immigration, and higher courts should swiftly overturn this obstructionist ruling.
The real issue is how much time and damage this legal battle will cause before justice is restored.
The Bottom Line:
This ruling is a temporary roadblock, not the final word.
Trump’s immigration policies are well within legal precedent, and higher courts should overturn this activist decision.
The fight over America’s borders continues, but the law remains on the president’s side.
Read Next
– Iconic Mall Retailer Set to Declare Bankruptcy, Liquidate All 350 Stores
– Muslim Group Accused of ‘Financial Irregularities’, $7.2M of Taxpayer Money Has Vanished