Connect with us

Politics

Judge to Consider Block on Trump’s Use of Wartime Law to Deport Venezuelans

Published

on

Judge to Consider Block on Trump’s Use of Wartime Law to Deport Venezuelans

A hearing has been set for Friday afternoon to debate whether a federal judge in Washington acted correctly when he temporarily stopped the Trump administration last weekend from summarily deporting scores of Venezuelan immigrants under a powerful but rarely invoked wartime statute.

The hearing, scheduled for 2:30 p.m. in Federal District Court in Washington, could also include some discussion about the Justice Department’s repeated recalcitrance in responding to the judge’s demands. He has been requesting information about two deportation flights in particular, which officials say carried members of a Venezuelan street gang, Tren de Aragua, to El Salvador.

The judge, James E. Boasberg, scolded the department in a stern order on Thursday for having “evaded its obligations” to provide him with data about the flights. He wants that information as he seeks to determine whether the Trump administration violated his initial instructions to turn the planes around after they left the United States on Saturday evening.

Most of the courtroom conversation, however, is likely to concern Judge Boasberg’s underlying decision to stop the White House for now from using the wartime law, known as the Alien Enemies Act, to pursue its immigration agenda. The statute, passed in 1798, gives the government expansive powers during an invasion or a declared war to round up and summarily remove any subjects of a “hostile nation” over the age of 14 as “alien enemies.”

Almost from the moment Judge Boasberg entered his provisional decision barring President Trump from using the law, the White House and the Justice Department have accused him of overstepping his authority by improperly inserting himself into the president’s ability to conduct foreign affairs.

Advertisement

But Judge Boasberg imposed the order in the first place to give himself time to figure out whether Mr. Trump himself overstepped by stretching or even ignoring several of the statute’s provisions, which place checks on how and when it can be used.

The administration has repeatedly claimed, for instance, that members of Tren de Aragua should be considered subjects of a hostile nation because they are closely aligned with the Venezuelan government. The White House, echoing a position that Mr. Trump pushed during his campaign, has also insisted that the arrival to the United States of dozens of members of the gang constitutes an invasion.

But lawyers for some of the deported Venezuelans dispute those claims, saying that their clients are not gang members and should have the opportunity to prove it. The lawyers also say that while Tren de Aragua may be a dangerous criminal organization, which was recently designated as a terrorist organization, it is not a nation state.

Moreover, they have argued that even if the members of the group have come to the United States en masse, that does not fit the traditional definition of an invasion.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Video: Senator Corrects Noem’s Habeas Corpus Definition

Published

on

Video: Senator Corrects Noem’s Habeas Corpus Definition

new video loaded: Senator Corrects Noem’s Habeas Corpus Definition

transcript

transcript

Senator Corrects Noem’s Habeas Corpus Definition

During a Senate hearing, Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, falsely described habeas corpus as the president’s “constitutional right” to deport people.

So, Secretary Noem, what is habeas corpus? Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, suspend their rights. Let me. Let me stop you, ma’am. Habeas corpus. Excuse me. That’s incorrect. Habeas corpus. Excuse me. Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. So, Secretary Noem, do you support the core protection that habeas corpus provides. Yeah, I support habeas corpus. I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not. It has never been, let us be clear. It has never been done. It has never been done without approval of Congress. Even Abraham Lincoln got retroactive approval from Congress.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Politics

Continue Reading

Politics

Delaware's assisted suicide bill signed into law, making it the 11th state with such a statute

Published

on

Delaware's assisted suicide bill signed into law, making it the 11th state with such a statute

Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer, a Democrat, signed a bill Tuesday legalizing physician-assisted suicide for certain terminally ill patients, arguing that the measure is about “compassion, dignity, and respect for personal choice.”

The End-of-Life Options Act, which takes effect next year, allows mentally capable adults who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and given six months or less to live to request a prescription to self-administer and end their lives.

“We’re acknowledging today that even in the last moments of life, compassion matters,” Meyer said at the bill signing. “Every Delawarean should have the right to face their final chapter with peace, dignity and control.”

NEW YORK ASSEMBLY PASSES BILL TO LEGALIZE ASSISTED SUICIDE FOR THE TERMINALLY ILL

Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer signed a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide for some terminally ill patients. (Gov. Matt Meyer/Facebook)

Advertisement

“This signing today is about relieving suffering and giving families the comfort of knowing that their loved one was able to pass on their own terms, without unnecessary pain, and surrounded by the people they love most,” he continued.

Delaware is now the 11th state to allow medical aid in dying, joining California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont and Washington. Washington, D.C., also permits physician-assisted suicide.

“Today, Delaware joins a growing number of states in recognizing that end-of-life decisions belong to patients—not politicians,” Meyer said. “This law is about compassion, dignity, and respect. It gives people facing unimaginable suffering the ability to choose peace and comfort, surrounded by those they love. After years of debate, I am proud to sign HB 140 into law.”

The Delaware state capitol building

The End-of-Life Options Act goes into effect next year. (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)

Several other countries, including Canada, Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands, have also legalized so-called death with dignity.

The Delaware Legislature narrowly rejected the measure last year, but Meyer pushed for it this session and it passed last month. The governor’s signature now ends nearly a decade of debate on the issue.

Advertisement

Under the new law, sponsored by Democrat state Rep. Eric Morrison, patients considering assisted suicide in the state must be presented with other options for end-of-life care, including comfort care, palliative care, hospice and pain control. The bill requires two waiting periods and a second medical opinion on a patient’s prognoses before they can obtain a prescription for lethal medication.

MINNESOTA LAWMAKERS PROPOSE CONTROVERSIAL MEDICALLY-ASSISTED SUICIDE BILL

Delaware General Assembly

Delaware is now the 11th state to allow medical aid in dying. (Getty Images)

State Senate Majority Leader Bryan Townsend, a Democrat, said the law “is about honoring the autonomy and humanity of those facing unimaginable suffering from terminal illness.”

“This legislation exists due to the courage of patients, family members, and advocates who have shared deeply personal stories of love, loss and suffering,” he said in a statement.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Villaraigosa blasts Harris and Becerra for not speaking out about Biden's decline

Published

on

Villaraigosa blasts Harris and Becerra for not speaking out about Biden's decline

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a 2026 candidate for California governor, criticized former Vice President Kamala Harris and former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra on Tuesday as complicit in covering up former President Biden’s cognitive decline while in office.

Villaraigosa said those actions, in part, led to President Trump winning the November election. Becerra, who previously served as California‘s attorney general, is also in the running for governor, and Harris is considering jumping into the race. All three are Democrats.

“At the highest levels of our government, those in power were intentionally complicit or told outright lies in a systematic cover up to keep Joe Biden’s mental decline from the public,” Villaraigosa said in a statement. “Now, we have come to learn this cover up includes two prominent California politicians who served as California Attorney General — one who is running for Governor and another who is thinking about running for Governor. Voters deserve to know the truth, what did Kamala Harris and Xavier Becerra know, when did they know it, and most importantly, why didn’t either of them speak out?”

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, from left, former Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and former Vice President Kamala Harris.

(Godofredo A. Vásquez, Nathan Ellgren, Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Advertisement

Villaraigosa based his remarks on excerpts from “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” written by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson and publicly released Tuesday.

The book, largely relying on anonymous sources, argues that Biden’s confidants and inner circle kept his deteriorating state from the American people, resulting in the Republican victory in the 2024 presidential election.

The book portrays Biden as in decline for as long as a decade, and argues that a circle of political advisors and his family hid his condition from voters.

“Kamala Harris and Xavier Becerra took an oath of office and were entrusted to protect the American people, but instead Kamala Harris repeatedly said there was nothing wrong with Biden and Becerra turned a blind eye,” Villaraigosa said.

Advertisement

“Original Sin” was published shortly after the former president disclosed on Sunday that he had been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that had spread to his bones.

One example of Biden’s cognitive decline cited by the authors was that he confused Becerra with homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, according to the New York Times.

Asked to respond to Villaraigosa’s attack, Becerra did not address this incident but expressed well wishes for the former president and his family as Biden begins treatment. He also defended his dealings with the former president when he was the nation’s health chief.

“I met with President Biden when needed to make important decisions and to execute with my team at HHS,” Becerra said in a statement. “It’s clear the President was getting older, but he made the mission clear: run the largest health agency in the world, expand care to millions more Americans than ever before, negotiate down the cost of prescription drugs, and pull us out of a world-wide pandemic. And we delivered.”

Attempts to reach a representative for Harris were unsuccessful Tuesday afternoon.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending