Subterms
Databases that Elon Musk’s team is trying to access include more than 300 personal details about members of the U.S. public.The federal government knows your mother’s maiden name and your bank account number. The student debt you hold. Your disability status. The company that employs you and the wages you earn there. And that’s just a start. More
Broadening their efforts to stop the Trump administration from using a rarely invoked wartime statute to carry out deportations, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday asked a federal judge in Texas to bar the White House from using the law to send Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador.The filings by the A.C.L.U., submitted in Federal District Court in Brownsville, Texas, were in direct response to a Supreme Court decision on Monday. That ruling permitted the migrants to challenge efforts to deport them under the wartime law, known as the Alien Enemies Act, but only in the place they were being held.The three Venezuelans identified in the Texas filings — albeit only by their initials — had already secured a court order from a federal judge in Washington last month shielding them from being flown to El Salvador under President Trump’s invocation of the act. But the Supreme Court, in its ruling, vacated the order by that judge, James E. Boasberg, saying that the A.C.L.U.’s case on behalf of the men should have been filed in Texas, not Washington.On Tuesday, the A.C.L.U. filed a similar case in New York, noting that two of the Venezuelans subject to Mr. Trump’s proclamation had been moved from a detention center in Texas to one in the town of Goshen, in Orange County, N.Y. An emergency hearing has been scheduled in that case for Wednesday morning in Federal District Court in Manhattan.Mr. Trump’s efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport scores of Venezuelan migrants have set off one of the most contentious legal battles of his second term. It began last month, after the president invoked the act, which has been used only three times since it was passed in 1798, to authorize the deportation of people he claims were members of Tren de Aragua, a violent Venezuelan street gang.The A.C.L.U. immediately challenged Mr. Trump’s use of the act in court filings in Washington, even as the administration rushed more than 100 Venezuelan migrants on to planes to El Salvador. Once there, they were put in a megaprison called CECOT, known for its brutal conditions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Immigration lawyers are reacting to the Supreme Court’s ruling, which declared that any legal challenges to the Trump administration’s plan to use a wartime statute to deport a group of Venezuelan migrants have to be filed where the men are being held.And as they scrambled to adjust on Tuesday, their efforts could be guided by a similar case that is underway in Federal District Court in Brownsville, Texas. It was filed last month by Daniel Zacarias Matos, a Venezuelan migrant who claimed that the administration tried to deport him — without a hearing or an order of removal — under President Trump’s recent proclamation invoking the wartime law, the Alien Enemies Act.In mid-March, Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr., who is handling the case, issued an order stopping Mr. Zacarias Matos from being deported until he could look deeper into the matter. His lawyers and lawyers for the Justice Department are expected to file dueling court papers this month laying out the details of what happened.While the facts in Mr. Zacarias Matos’s case do not line up exactly with those in the cases of the Venezuelan migrants directly affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling, they could shed light on some of those proceedings as they start to move forward, most likely one by one.According to court papers, Mr. Zacarias Matos came to the United States with his 8-year-old daughter in December 2023, seeking asylum from Venezuela. Federal immigration agents took him into custody in October at the El Paso County Jail after he was arrested on charges of violating the terms of his probation on two, now-dismissed misdemeanor charges, court papers show.Early last month, the papers say, Mr. Zacarias Matos was sent to the El Valle Detention Center in Raymondville, Texas, where the administration was holding scores of Venezuelan migrants they were planning to deport to a prison in El Salvador under the expansive powers of the Alien Enemies Act.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
The family was returned to New York after being taken into custody last month and held at a detention center in Texas, officials and advocates said.Three children and their mother have been released from federal custody after being detained by immigration enforcement agents last month at an upstate New York dairy farm, officials said on Monday.The case sent shock waves through tiny Sackets Harbor, N.Y., a village of about 1,400 people on Lake Ontario where the children were enrolled, and well liked, at the town’s school.The family’s detention was another move amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown to touch off protests. About 1,000 people rallied on the family’s behalf on Saturday, according to North Country Public Radio.The release of the woman and her children — a third grader and two high school students — was announced by Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and the local state assemblyman, Scott Gray, a Republican“We are open to working with federal immigration enforcement to crack down on gang members or violent criminals,” Ms. Hochul said in a statement. “But I will never support cruel actions that rip kids out of school or tear families apart.”Mr. Gray said in a separate statement that “we are all profoundly grateful” that the family had been returned to New York.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Cite as: 604 U. S.
(2025)
9
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting
whether its March 15 deportations complied with the Dis-
trict Court’s orders, it simultaneously sought permission to
resume summary deportations under the Proclamation.
The District Court, first, denied the Government’s motion
to vacate its temporary restraining order, rejecting the as-
sertion that “the President’s authority and discretion under
the [Alien Enemies Act] is not a proper subject for judicial
scrutiny.” App. to BIO 71a. At the very least, the District
Court concluded, the plaintiffs were “likely to succeed” on
their claim that, “before they may be deported, they are en-
titled to individualized hearings to determine whether the
Act applies to them at all.” 2025 WL 890401, *2. The D. C.
Circuit, too, denied the Government a requested stay and
kept in place the District Court’s pause on deportations un-
der the Alien Enemies Act pending further proceedings.
2025 WL 914682, *1 (per curiam) (Mar. 26, 2025).
It is only this Court that sees reason to vacate, for the
second time this week, a temporary restraining order
standing “on its last legs.” Department of Education, 604
U. S., at (JACKSON, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 1). Not
content to wait until tomorrow, when the District Court will
have a chance to consider full preliminary injunction brief-
ing at a scheduled hearing, this Court intervenes to relieve
the Government of its obligation under the order.
II
Begin with that upon which all nine Members of this
Court agree. The Court’s order today dictates, in no uncer-
tain terms, that “individual[s] subject to detention and re-
moval under the [Alien Enemies Act are] entitled to judicial
review’ as to ‘questions of interpretation and constitution-
ality’ of the Act as well as whether he or she ‘is in fact an
alien enemy fourteen years of age or older.”” Ante, at 2
(quoting Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U. S. 160, 163–164, 172,
n. 17 (1948)). Therefore, under today’s order, courts below More
The Trump administration committed a “grievous error” that “shocks the conscience” by inadvertently deporting a Salvadoran migrant to a notorious prison last month and then declaring there was little it could do to bring him back, a federal judge in Maryland said on Sunday.The strongly worded order by the judge, Paula Xinis, served two purposes: It offered a more detailed explanation of a brief ruling she issued on Friday, demanding that the White House bring the migrant, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, back to the United States by the end of Monday. And it rejected a request by the Justice Department to pause the order as a federal appeals court considered its validity.Over 22 pages, Judge Xinis took Trump officials to task for deporting Mr. Abrego Garcia to El Salvador on March 15 in violation of a previous court order that allowed him to stay in the United States. Administration officials then argued that neither they nor she as the judge overseeing the case had any power to retrieve him from the prison.“As defendants acknowledge, they had no legal authority to arrest him, no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador — let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere,” Judge Xinis wrote. “Having confessed grievous error, the defendants now argue that this court lacks the power to hear this case, and they lack the power to order Abrego Garcia’s return.”Moreover, Judge Xinis questioned the administration’s underlying claims that Mr. Abrego Garcia, 29, was a member of a violent transnational street gang, MS-13, which officials recently designated as a terrorist organization. The judge described those claims as being based on “a singular unsubstantiated allegation.”“The ‘evidence’ against Abrego Garcia consisted of nothing more than his Chicago Bulls hat and hoodie,” she wrote, “and a vague, uncorroborated allegation from a confidential informant claiming he belonged to MS-13’s ‘Western’ clique in New York — a place he has never lived.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
A woman detained by U.S. border officers for overstaying a visitor visa died by suicide while in custody, according to a Democratic congresswoman.A Chinese woman detained by U.S. border officers for overstaying a visitor visa died by suicide while being held at a border patrol station in Arizona, a Democratic congresswoman said.The woman had been taken into custody in California after officers determined that she had overstayed a visitor visa, Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington said in a statement, citing the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency. She was transferred to a patrol station in Yuma, Ariz., the statement said.Ms. Jayapal, a ranking member of the House subcommittee overseeing immigration, said initial reports from the agency had raised concerns about whether officers had properly conducted welfare checks on the woman. While welfare checks were logged, officials at the agency investigating the death could not verify whether the checks had actually happened, Ms. Jayapal said.“There is no excuse for why agents cannot verify if some of the necessary welfare checks occurred — or why some of the documented welfare checks were incorrectly reported,” Ms. Jayapal said, adding that she was concerned about the conditions in facilities where immigrants are detained.“Another preventable death only increases that concern,” she said.The woman had been in the country on a B-1/B-2 visa, according to the statement, a temporary visa for people visiting the United States for tourism or business.The Customs and Border Protection agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for the agency confirmed the death of a 52-year-old woman to The Tucson Sentinel, and said that the woman had become “unresponsive in a cell” at the Yuma Border Patrol Station.Border Patrol staff provided medical assistance to the woman, the spokesman said in a statement to The Sentinel, and emergency medical services transported her to a hospital, where she was pronounced dead. An office overseeing the agency’s conduct was investigating the incident, the statement said, and the agency also reported the death to the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General.The exact circumstances around the woman’s initial detainment were not immediately clear. Border Patrol officials for the Yuma sector, which includes parts of California and Arizona, said last week on social media that they had arrested two Chinese people, one of them a 52-year-old woman, in Needles, Calif., on March 26.According to the post, agents searched a minivan during a vehicle stop and discovered that two Chinese nationals were “illegally present in the U.S.” The agency had planned to charge the two people under a law that makes certain people ineligible to receive a visa or enter the country, including on the grounds of suspected money laundering or other criminal activity.More than $220,000 in cash was also seized from the van, and the agency said it believed the cash was linked to illegal activity. But it was not immediately clear on Friday whether the woman arrested in Needles was the same woman who died while in custody.Christine Hauser More
Influential figures on the right have largely cheered on the opening months of the Trump presidency. But as the administration has rushed to carry out deportations as quickly as possible, making mistakes and raising concerns about due process along the way, the unified front in favor of President Trump’s immigration purge is beginning to crack.When the administration deported a professional makeup artist and accused him of being part of a criminal gang, the enormously popular podcaster Joe Rogan balked.“You’ve got to get scared that people who are not criminals are getting lassoed up and deported and sent to El Salvador prisons,” Mr. Rogan, who endorsed Mr. Trump, said on his show “The Joe Rogan Experience.” He added that the case was “horrific.”When the administration arrested a former Columbia University graduate student who had been involved in campus protests, the far-right commentator Ann Coulter questioned the move.“There’s almost no one I don’t want to deport, but unless they’ve committed a crime, isn’t this a violation of the First Amendment?” Ms. Coulter wrote on social media.The dissenting voices, which have been limited mostly to commentators rather than elected Republicans, are remarkable because conservatives don’t often openly break with the president. And while the objections have largely been contained to tactics — not the overarching goal of ramping up deportations — the cracks show how seriously some conservatives are taking the administration’s aggressive and at times slapdash methods.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
The Trump administration has granted itself the authority to summarily deport Venezuelan migrants accused of being members of a violent street gang on the basis of little more than whether they have tattoos or have worn clothing associated with the criminal organization, new court papers show.The papers suggest that the administration has set a low bar for seeking the removal of migrants whom officials have described as belonging to the street gang, Tren de Aragua. This month, the White House ordered the deportation of more than 100 people suspected of being members of the gang under a powerful wartime statute, the Alien Enemies Act, and have denied them any due process to challenge the allegations against them.In the court papers, submitted over the weekend, lawyers for the Venezuelan migrants produced a government document, titled “Alien Enemy Validation Guide,” that laid out a series of criteria administration officials are required to meet to designate the men as members of Tren de Aragua.The document established a scoring system for deciding whether the migrants were in fact members of the gang, which is often referred to as TdA, asserting that eight points were required for any individual to be identified as a member.According to the document, any migrant who admitted to being a member of the gang was assigned 10 points, meaning that they were automatically deemed to belong to the group and were subject to immediate deportation under the Alien Enemies Act.But the document also asserts that officials can assign four points to a migrant simply for having “tattoos denoting membership/loyalty to TDA” and another four points if law enforcement agents decide that the person in question “displays insignia, logos, notations, drawings, or dress known to indicate allegiance to TDA.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
