The Supreme Court on Friday granted a request by Venezuelan nationals seeking an injunction against their removal from the United States under the Alien Enemies Act.

In an unsigned decision, the court said the Trump administration had not given the detainees enough time or adequate resources to challenge their deportations.

“Under these circumstances, notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster,” the ruling said.

The court did not rule on whether the Alien Enemies Act, which the Trump administration invoked in mid-April to deport the detainees, had been applied correctly.

    • FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      The crazy thing about using that act is that I hadn’t heard of Venezuelan migrants specifically being criminal masterminds or even Tren de Aragua until Trump was in office this year. Just like I hadn’t heard much about ms13 until Trump’s first term. (I had heard of them but not nearly as much as after he talked about them in a speech)

      So how can he declare Venezuela an enemy if the actions he was focusing on weren’t even national news until he pushed the narrative?

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m pretty sure he just held the tail of Fox News’ propaganda since it was already effectively riling up his base.

        He went off on Haitians eating dogs and cats only after the prison break in February began its fearmongering through right wing media. It’s just an angle to him.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        If you read the article text, the ruling wasn’t on whether Trump’s use of the act in the first place was proper or not, but rather on a narrow technical aspect of how the Executive Branch implemented it.

        I would expect a ruling that depended on whether or not the situation constituted an “invasion” would be unanimous.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Although it is unsigned, the two usual suspects wrote a dissent. I guess we should be lucky that all of Trump’s appointees are not as consistently wrong-headed as Thomas and Alito.

    Maybe once God forces one of them off the court, their replacement won’t be quite as bad …

    … Who am I kidding, we’re gonna get Emil Bove or Alina Habba or some other young moron who will make even dumber rulings for the next 40 years.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      What’s fascinating is NONE of Trumps appointments went with Alito and Thomas, not one of them.

    • 7355608@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      What about that judge who stymied cheeto’s federal cases for 4 years? They where really working the shaft for him.