The Monday ruling means the Trump administration can try to resume deportations under the rarely used 1798 Alien Enemies Act, as long as detainees are given due process, says NBC News.
The ruling is 5-4, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissenting in part with the three liberal justices.
The ruling doesn’t address the constitutionality of using the Alien Enemies Act to send the migrants to a prison in El Salvador. The justices instead have issued a narrow procedural ruling, saying that the migrants’ lawyers filed their lawsuit in the wrong court, says The New York Times.
The justices say it should have been filed in Texas, where Venezuelans are being held, rather than in Washington.
The court's unsigned majority opinion says, “AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”
The decision lifts orders issued by Washington-based U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. The original lawsuit was filed by five Venezuelans, with Boasberg provisionally certifying it as a class action that applies to all Venezuelans in U.S. custody who aren't U.S. citizens.
A habeas proceeding ordinarily can only be used by a single individual to challenge their detention by the government. That means judges only can bar detention on a person-by-person basis, says Vox.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor says in a 17-page dissent that “individuals who are unable to secure counsel, or who cannot timely appeal an adverse judgment rendered by a habeas court, face the prospect of removal directly into the perilous conditions of El Salvador’s [Center for Terrorism Confinement], where detainees suffer egregious human rights abuses.”
Habeas proceedings have to be brought in the place where the person seeking relief is detained, says Vox. So far, the Trump administration has transferred prisoners it intends to deport under the Alien Enemies Act to Texas, which is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
“The Fifth Circuit is the most right-wing court in the federal appellate system. If someone brings a habeas suit in its jurisdiction, and the decision is appealed to the Fifth Circuit, the court could hand down a precedent that means any habeas proceedings challenging these deportations would fail,” Vox says.
In the likely event that the Fifth Circuit denies relief to the people Trump seeks to deport, one of them is likely to seek Supreme Court review of whether the Alien Enemies Act can be used by Trump to deport people, Vox says.
As far as reactions, Attorney General Pam Bondi says on X: “An activist judge in Washington, D.C. does not have the jurisdiction to seize control of President Trump’s authority to conduct foreign policy and keep the American people safe.”
Lee Gelernt, lead attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs who were deported, says that, overall, the group is pleased with the court's ruling.
“We are disappointed that we will need to start the court process over again in a different venue, but the critical point is that the court rejected the government’s remarkable position that it does not even have to give individuals meaningful advance notice to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act. That is a big victory.”