Skip to content
General-news — Politics — Says — War-and-conflicts — Protocols — Justices — Boasberg — Deportation

Deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act proceed, yet DC judge expresses apprehension over Trump administration's actions.

Trump administration's imminent deportation of migrants in Texas, as per the Alien Enemies Act, was deemed unfettered by a federal judge in Washington, DC, despite his apprehensions over the administration's moves. He could not halt the deportations, despite his concerns.

,   and  ASMedia
3 min read
Judge James Boasberg, head honcho of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,...
Judge James Boasberg, head honcho of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, poses for a photograph at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C., on March 16, 2023.

Deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act proceed, yet DC judge expresses apprehension over Trump administration's actions.

Updated Scenario:

In the hotbed of immigration controversy, a federal judge in Washington, DC, has been grappling with the Trump administration's plans to deport migrants under the Alien Enemies Act. During an emergency hearing, Judge James Boasberg expressed his concerns about the administration's actions but acknowledged his lack of authority to intervene.

"I get where you're coming from, I truly do," Judge Boasberg told the migrants' lawyer, "but I don't think I have the power to do anything."

Before announcing his decision, Judge Boasberg pressed the Justice Department attorney on whether the administration would move forward with the deportations over the weekend. The attorney confirmed that while no flights were planned yet, Homeland Security maintained the right to remove the migrants on Saturday.

Lawyers for the migrants have appeals pending at the Supreme Court and the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The case initially challenged President Donald Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century wartime authority, and traveled to the Supreme Court earlier.

Judge Boasberg expressed doubts about intervening, given the Appeals Court and Supreme Court's standing on the issue. "It's challenging for me to insert myself into this growing controversy," he said.

The current dispute underscores the administration's determination to carry out deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, which bypasses some immigration protocols, streamlining the process for removing migrants in the US illegally.

At Friday's hearing, the ACLU attorney presented new evidence about the notice migrants received from the administration about their impending deportations. The migrants, it was revealed, received less than 24 hours' notice, with no clear process for challenging their removal.

The Justice Department attorney argued that while the Supreme Court's order demanded notice, it did not require a provision for challenging the deportations. He assured the court that anyone seeking to challenge their removal would be granted a process to do so.

"I can't help but find the notice troubling," Judge Boasberg commented, expressing doubt that it complied with the Supreme Court's ruling. However, he reiterated that he lacked the ability to grant urgent relief.

The legal battle continues as migrants, advocates, and the courts race to ensure proper notice and legal recourse for those targeted for removal under the Alien Enemies Act.

Integrated Insights:

  1. The Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. J. G. G. (April 7, 2025) established that individuals targeted for removal under the Alien Enemies Act are entitled to challenge their removals through habeas corpus, ensuring they have meaningful notice and an opportunity to contest their removal.[1]
  2. Recent legal actions include emergency lawsuits filed to halt removals under the Alien Enemies Act, motions for temporary restraining orders, class certification, and declarations asserting the urgency for ensuring migrants receive proper notice and legal opportunities.[2]
  3. Previously, a federal appeals court had upheld a block on the Trump administration's use of the act for deportations, citing concerns over the lack of judicial review and due process.[3]

[1]https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-1187_6j37.pdf[2]https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/detainees-again-sued-trump-administrations-deportation-plans-74829421[3]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/25/us/politics/trump-deportations-alien-enemies-act.html

  1. Judge Boasberg, expressing concerns over the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, questioned the administration's attorney about the migrants' rights to challenge their removal during Friday's hearing.
  2. The Justice Department attorney, at the hearing, argued that while the Supreme Court's order demanded notice, it did not require a provision for challenging the deportations, stating that anyone seeking to challenge their removal would be granted a process.
  3. Judge Boasberg commented on the notice migrants received, finding it troubling and expressing doubt that it complied with the Supreme Court's ruling, providing meaningful notice and an opportunity to contest their removal.
  4. In a previous legal action, a federal appeals court had upheld a block on the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, citing concerns over the lack of judicial review and due process.
  5. The legal battle over the administration's deportation policy under the Alien Enemies Act continues, with ongoing emergency lawsuits, motions for temporary restraining orders, class certification, and declarations asserting the urgency for ensuring migrants receive proper notice and legal opportunities.

Read also:

Related

Latest