newYou can listen to Fox’s news articles!
Many in the media will believe that President Donald Trump has directed obscure laws to mistakenly banish violent members of a terrorist gang known as Tren de Aragua (TDA).
In fact, the law is vague and not misdirected.
The Alien Enemy Law (AEA) was passed by Congress and signed the law in 1798. It was established, never abolished, and was reviewed multiple times by the court. Four different presidents evoke it, three of whom were Democrats in the 20th century. Furthermore, this law is not limited to wartime authority as part of its claim. Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman used the act a lot after both world wars ended.
Just as Trump sends a “strong and clear” message, “deportation has begun,” the White House says
The AEA allows the president to order arrest and removal without listening to “an alien enemy” whenever there is a declared war or “Pragmatic invasions” made, attempted and threatened against the United States. Predatory intrusion is widely defined as entry into the United States for purposes that violate the interests of the state and the law. This language gives the President a wide latitude in his core obligation to protect the safety and security of his citizens.
In 1948, the US Supreme Court upheld Truman’s use of the AEA and held that the law itself was constitutional (Ludeckev. Watkins, 33 US 160). Importantly, the High Court said the president’s decision under the law “thwarts judicial review of the removal order.” In other words, a judge cannot speculate on the president again. The court explained that “the very nature of the president’s authority to order the removal of all enemy aliens rejects the notion that the court can resort to the exercise of his discretion.”
The Supreme Court’s decision accepted what was called the “doctrine of political questions.” In other words, federal courts may not intervene in presidential decisions that are inherently political, inherently political, such as diplomatic or national security acts. By analogy, we do not allow judges to halt drone strikes or suspend intelligence reporting operations.
This brings us to events over the past few days. On Friday, President Trump invoked alien enemy laws under “predatory intrusion” regulations. Approximately 260 illegal aliens were quickly deported to El Salvador, many of which were under the authority of the AEA. These include killers, rapists, and other violent offenders who engaged in the trafficking of human, drugs, and weapons.
A considerable number of exiled were known members of Tren de Aragua, officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization. “They are illegally infiltrating the United States, carrying out irregular wars and carrying out hostile actions against the United States,” according to the White House. Evidence shows that they are still engaged in narcoterrorism while foreign countries still operating at the request of the Nicolas Maduro administration of Venezuela.
Even before Trump issued the declaration, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) ran to a U.S. District Judge in Washington, DC, who looked like a classic case of “forum shopping.” As expected, Obama’s appointee, Judge James Boasberg, issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) to block Trump’s actions.
There are several troubling aspects to Boasberg’s directive. First, he acted without plaguing the government’s contacts, robbing the Trump administration of the opportunity to respond. Second, the five-named plaintiffs in the ACLU petition were TDA gang members detained in Texas, a Washington, DC judge, without jurisdiction. Third, the exclusive remedy for litigators challenging the AEA is not a temporary restraining order, but a habeas-protection petition. Fourth, the judge magically transformed the entire lawsuit into a class action lawsuit, extending the restraining order to all non-citizens who could be affected by Trump’s call to the AEA.
Finally, Boasberg knew that the plane carrying TDA terrorists wanted to turn the air into the air and return to the US. Perhaps he found himself not authorized to issue orders redirect flights across US soil and airspace. But his willingness to put such outlaw desires into words is a window into the thoughts of political views on Trump and activist judges who may have decided his judicial decisions instead of the law.
On behalf of the President, the Department of Justice is currently seeking a stay pending review by the DC Court of Appeals. Depending on the court’s decision, the case could be over again in the Supreme Court’s hands.
For more information about Fox News, click here
Judge Boasberg reportedly stated that alien enemy law “provides no basis for the president’s declaration given the term aggression, the term predatory aggression is actually carried out by the state and is associated with hostile acts permeated into war.” In the case of truth, the comment can only be described as a hurry and judgement, in order to completely deny any knowledge or relevant information, as there was no fair hearing before he issued his TRO. Boasberg needs to oppose himself by assuming facts that are not in evidence.
People in America, exhausted by violent immigration crimes, support precious deportation. They expressed their desires at the ballot box. Do serious people believe that dangerous foreign gangs like Tren de Aragua, who terrorized innocent victims, should be allowed to stay here? President Trump is using all the tools the law gives him to drive out enemy aliens that poses a certain threat.
Click here to get the Fox News app
More than two centuries ago, Congress was well aware of such dangers. That’s exactly why it passed a wide range of laws that granted the president the sole authority to drive out enemy aliens. 150 years later, the Supreme Court upheld the law when it said, “The conduct of this alien enemy remains a law of land that has not changed in effect since 1798.”
Lower court judges are obligated to follow the Supreme Court precedent. That alone makes Judge Boasberg’s sudden ruling wrong as a matter of law.
