On April 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice formally requested the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a temporary restraining order imposed by a federal district court. This order restricts the Trump administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan immigrants, a move that has sparked significant controversy and debate.

Background of the Case

President Donald Trump called for deportations under the Alien Enemies Act in mid-March, claiming that certain Venezuelan nationals were linked to criminal gangs—an assertion that has met with skepticism from legal experts, who argue that these individuals are victims of political oppression and deserve due process.

Legal Controversy

On March 15, the same day that Trump issued an executive order regarding the deportations, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg granted a nationwide restraining order, effectively halting the removals. This provision, typically reserved for wartime, allows the president to deport noncitizens without a judicial review.

In subsequent proceedings, a federal appeals court upheld Judge Boasberg’s decision while further examining the legal complexities involved in the case, leading the Trump administration to appeal to the nation’s highest court.

Arguments Presented

During the appeal, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris presented the administration’s case, emphasizing the importance of presidential authority in national security matters. She contended that the issues at stake present “fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national-security-related operations in this country.” Harris further argued that lower court rulings are obstructing the president’s ability to safeguard the nation from foreign threats.

Reactions and Implications

The administration has expressed frustration over the judiciary’s perceived overreach, with Trump labeling Judge Boasberg as a “Radical Left Lunatic” and suggesting that he should face impeachment. These remarks were echoed by some lawmakers, including Rep. Brandon Gill of Texas, who indicated plans to pursue impeachment articles against the judge.

In a rare intervention, Chief Justice John Roberts publicly criticized calls for the impeachment of judges, reinforcing the independence of the judicial branch.

Current Status

The notable case continues to develop in the Supreme Court, and its outcomes could set critical precedents regarding executive power and immigration enforcement. Legal experts and advocates are closely monitoring the proceedings, as the implications are vast for both national security and the personal rights of noncitizens.