2 Judges Limit Trump’s Deportations Under Wartime Law

New lawsuits were filed in Texas and New York after the Supreme Court removed blocks in Washington.

Prisoners sit at maximum security penitentiary CECOT in Tecoluca, El Salvador, on April 4, 2025. Alex Peña/Getty Images

Two federal judges have limited the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act—a wartime law that gives the president powers to imprison and remove noncitizens—to deport individuals in Texas and New York who sued after the Supreme Court removed similar orders from Washington.

U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, of the Southern District of Texas, said in an April 9 order that removing individuals under Trump’s March 15 proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act—in which he declared an invasion of the United States by the Venezuelan gang Tren De Aragua—would “cause immediate and irreparable injury to the removed individuals.”

His order expires on April 23 but could be extended.

It also applies to three Venezuelan plaintiffs and others subject to removal from a detention center in Texas.

On April 9, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein issued a similar order after the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit over two plaintiffs detained in New York.

In a written decision, Hellerstein certified a class of individuals that included “all noncitizens in U.S. custody in the Southern District of New York who were, are, or will be subject to” Trump’s proclamation and hadn’t been given notice following the Supreme Court’s decision and granted a hearing.

He added that the notice must be written in English and Spanish, while prospective hearings must include Spanish-to-English interpreters if needed.

A temporary restraining order from Hellerstein prevented the administration from transferring members of the class, including the plaintiffs, from the Southern District of New York.

Those cases came just after the Supreme Court vacated two orders from a federal judge in Washington who blocked Trump’s ability to deport under the March 15 proclamation.

In issuing its decision, a majority of the Supreme Court said that the case had been brought in the wrong court, noting that the plaintiffs were confined in Texas and that individuals who challenged the administration needed to do so in the district where they were confined.

Their unsigned opinion also said the administration must provide some kind of notice to the detainees.

“Detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act,” the Supreme Court’s opinion read.

“The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”

Habeas relief refers to a legal avenue for detainees to challenge their confinement.

Attorney General Pam Bondi praised the Supreme Court’s decision and stated on social media platform X on April 7 that “the American people can rest assured” that she, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Border Czar Tom Homan “will direct our assets to scour the country for any remnants of Tren De Aragua and DEPORT THEM.”

The lawsuit in Washington had attempted to utilize a different legal avenue, but the more recent actions in Texas and New York sought relief under habeas.

In Rodriguez’s order, he said no immigration court had issued a final order of removal against the three plaintiffs—identified as “J.A.V.,” “J.G.G.,” and “W.G.H.” —but that the government had tried to remove them on at least one occasion based on Trump’s proclamation.

In Washington, the administration told U.S. District Judge James Boasberg that it had deported many others based on legal authority other than the Alien Enemies Act.

Rodriguez said in his order that without an injunction, or block on the administration’s actions, the individuals “would be unable to seek habeas relief.”

The plaintiffs in the New York lawsuit similarly expressed concern that the government would remove individuals without the required judicial review.

The Department of Justice did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment before publication time.

Trump has said in the past that he would follow court orders.