Politics
Supreme Court faces Guantanamo test again: Does president's power have limits?
WASHINGTON — Two decades ago, the Bush administration said its “war on terror” prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay were off-limits to the federal courts, but the Supreme Court disagreed.
“A state of war is not a blank check for the President,” said Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in 2004. “Whatever power the U.S. Constitution envisions for the Executive in its exchanges with other nations or with enemy organizations…, it most assuredly envisions a role for all three branches when individual liberties are at stake.”
Only Justice Clarence Thomas dissented.
That issue is now back before the Supreme Court.
Although the nation is not at war, President Trump has invoked his war powers under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to round up and deport to El Salvador about 200 alleged members of a Venezuelan crime gang.
Two legal questions arose immediately.
How can Trump rely on the 1798 law, which applies only when Congress has “declared war” or a “foreign government” has launched an “invasion”?
And how does the government know all these men are gang members? Their families said they have no criminal records, and in some instances, fled Venezuela and sought asylum to escape the gangs.
So far, however, the legal fight has focused on the same big question from the Guantanamo era: Do federal judges have the authority to limit the power of the president who says he is protecting the nation from “dangerous aliens”?
On Friday, Trump’s acting solicitor general Sarah Harris urged the Supreme Court to set aside the judge’s order that put a temporary pause on further deportations.
“This case presents fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national-security-related operations in this country — the President…or the Judiciary,” she wrote in her appeal. “The Constitution supplies a clear answer: the President. The republic cannot afford a different choice.”
The justices asked for a response from the American Civil Liberties Union by Tuesday. The fast-moving case poses an early test of whether the high court will uphold the president’s power to swiftly deport migrants without interference from judges.
Two weeks ago, Trump signed a proclamation that Tren De Araqua, a Venezuelan crime gang, was “perpetrating…an invasion” of the United States and ordering the “prompt removal” of all those who were held.
On the afternoon of Saturday, March 15, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg convened a hastily arranged hearing in response to an emergency lawsuit brought on behalf of five Venezuelan men who feared they would be deported to El Salvador.
At the same hour, administration officials were arranging for three planes to take off from Texas.
The judge questioned how the 1798 law could authorize such deportations, and “to preserve the status quo,” he ordered a temporary pause on all the deportations.
Although the five named plaintiffs stayed in Texas, the administration essentially ignored the broader order and allowed the three flights to proceed as planned.
Although the judge said he was troubled his orders were ignored, Trump’s lawyers were troubled by his intervention.
“These orders are an affront to the President’s broad constitutional and statutory authority to protect the United States from dangerous aliens who pose grave threats to the American people,” they said on behalf of Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi.
“The presidential actions they challenge are not subject to judicial review,” they said.
“The Constitution simply provides no basis for … no basis for second-guessing the policy judgment by the Executive that such an ‘invasion’ is occurring,” they said. The president “has an inherent authority to conduct foreign affairs and address national security risks.”
They took a hard line and refused to even disclose the flight times for airplanes that flew to El Salvador.
That’s a “state secret,” they said in a brief filed on Monday.
Veterans of the legal battles over Guantanamo see some similarities but differences as well.
UC Berkeley Law professor John Yoo, a former Bush administration attorney, said the Guantanamo prisoners were not brought into the United States.
“Here, there is no doubt that the Venezuelans sent to El Salvador were detained within the United States,” he said.
In the past, the Supreme Court has said people who are being held in this country, including noncitizens, have a right to due process of law.
Yoo said, “Trump is invoking the same arguments we made after 9/11 that the capture and detention of enemy prisoners during wartime fell exclusively within the President’s authority as Commander-in-Chief to conduct war.” He is also “making similar arguments as to why federal judges today should defer to the decisions of the executive branch during what he has determined is an invasion.”
But Yoo said he doubts the courts will uphold Trump’s reliance on the 1798 law.
Earlier this week, Boasberg explained his order was narrow in scope as well as temporary. It would not lead to the release any of the Venezuelans that are being held, and it does not prevent the government from deporting those who have a “final order of removal” under the U.S. immigration laws, he said. It prevents only deportations to El Salvador that are based on the disputed Alien Enemies Act.
It also resolved nothing about the plight of those who are now held in El Salvador.
On Monday, Trump’s lawyers asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to throw out Boasberg’s order but lost in a 2-1 decision.
Each of the judges wrote a lengthy opinion making a separate point.
Judge Karen Henderson, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, disputed the use of the Alien Enemies Act. “An invasion is a military act, not one of migration,” she said.
Judge Patricia Millett, an appointee of President Obama, said the detained men deserve a hearing to challenge the claim they were gang members.
Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented but said the detained men could file a habeas corpus claim in Texas where they are held.
ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who brought the lawsuit, said the decision preserving the judge’s order “means that hundreds of individuals remain protected from being sent to a notorious black-hole prison in a foreign country, without any due process whatsoever — perhaps for the rest of their lives.”
Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, called the D.C. Circuit’s decision “an important step for due process and the protection of the American people. President Trump is bound by the laws of this nation, and those laws do not permit him to use wartime powers when the United States is not at war and has not been invaded.”
In her appeal on Friday, Harris, the acting solicitor general, agreed with Walker that the Venezuelans held in Texas could file a writ of habeas corpus there.
ACLU attorneys and Millett dismissed that option as impractical. The hundreds of men who were held had no lawyers, they said, and no way to know they must file an individual legal claim in federal court.
Politics
Trump takes unusual step, lets bipartisan housing bill become law unsigned amid SAVE pressure campaign
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A bipartisan housing bill became law Saturday at midnight after President Donald Trump declined to sign it, capping a weeks-long saga over whether the president would veto the measure amid frustrations with Congress over his stalled agenda.
Trump refused to sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act — legislation aimed at expanding the nation’s housing stock and lowering costs — in an attempt to pressure Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, despite the housing bill clearing both chambers with overwhelming majorities.
“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, which is polling at 97% with the Republican Party, and very high with the non-politician Dumocrats,” he declared on Truth Social Friday morning.
The Trump-backed election measure, which would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections and impose voter ID requirements, has struggled to overcome the Senate’s 60-vote threshold.
Meanwhile, the House has not passed a version of the bill that includes the president’s proposed crackdown on mail-in voting and banning men from women’s sports.
President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, June 3, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/AP)
HOUSE CONSERVATIVES DERAIL GOP AGENDA IN SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWDOWN
Under the U.S. Constitution, Trump had 10 days, not including Sundays, to sign or veto the housing measure after the House formally transmitted the legislation to the White House in late June. The president ultimately chose neither option, allowing the measure to become law without his signature.
Though Trump declined to veto the legislation, he sharply criticized elements of the bill and argued it should not have been a legislative priority in recent weeks.
“It’s so unimportant … compared to the SAVE America Act,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in late June. “I think the SAVE America Act is exactly what it says. It’s saving America from crooked elections.”
Trump went on to call the housing bill “a yawn,” adding, “compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.”
It would have taken a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override a veto — a margin the House and Senate exceeded when they passed the legislation. However, it remains unclear whether so many Republicans would have defied the president had he vetoed the bill.
Trump also appeared to criticize the bill over a provision restricting Wall Street investors from purchasing single-family homes — a policy he first proposed during his January State of the Union address and later urged Congress to pass. Trump previously argued the investor ban would give individual homebuyers a leg up against private equity firms in the housing market.
“I don’t want to hurt people that own houses, too,” Trump later told reporters, appearing to reference the provision. “These people, for the first time in their lives, they have valuable houses. They’ve become rich. I don’t want to hurt them either. What you want to do is what’s good for everyone, get the interest rates down.”
The law also aims to boost housing supply by streamlining federal environmental reviews, loosening rules around the construction of factory-built homes, and incentivizing local governments to modify their zoning laws to allow more housing, among roughly 60 provisions.
Trump’s souring on the legislation created headaches for Republicans, who touted the bill as an affordability win as voters grapple with high housing costs.
“It’s irresponsible to postpone signing the Housing bill due to the SAVE Act,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., a retiring lawmaker who lost re-election to a Trump-backed challenger, wrote on social media. “We need to start delivering relief to people for the high cost of housing ASAP!!”
Construction workers stand on the roof of homes under construction at a new housing development on June 24, 2026, in Valencia, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
WARREN TELLS TRUMP TO ‘SIGN THE DAMN BILL’ AS BIPARTISAN HOUSING PACKAGE REMAINS STALLED IN WASHINGTON
Trump abruptly canceled a signing ceremony for the legislation at the U.S. Capitol in June with GOP leaders. The stage had already been set, with at least one senior Republican arriving unaware the president had called off the event shortly before it was scheduled to begin.
The president then declared he would not sign the legislation until Congress passed the SAVE America Act, despite Senate GOP leaders insisting the votes do not exist to advance the measure.
Trump has also expressed frustration with the Republican-controlled Senate for declining to weaken the legislative filibuster, which requires 60 votes to advance most legislation in the upper chamber.
“GET SMART REPUBLICANS, IF YOU DON’T, YOU WON’T BE IN OFFICE FOR LONG!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday.
Before Trump came out against the bill, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called it “one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history” and said it included an array of policies “long championed” by Trump.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 15, 2025. (Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Meanwhile, Trump political operative James Blair touted the legislation for including the president’s Wall Street investor ban, which he referred to as a “signature commitment.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has argued that Republicans will still promote the landmark housing bill ahead of November.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We’ll still celebrate it, but he’s trying to make a point, and I think he’s making it very effectively,” the speaker recently told reporters, referring to Trump. “And the fact that you all ask me every three steps down the hallway illustrates that he has achieved the desired objective, and that is to make SAVE America the number one thing, because if we don’t get that right, everybody’s concerned about what happens next.”
Politics
Trump administration clears path for controversial Mojave Desert water pipeline
The Trump administration has signed off on a company’s plan to convert an oil and gas pipeline to pump groundwater from the Mojave Desert to thirsty California cities for the first time, a lucrative venture that critics say threatens natural springs and wildlife.
The federal Bureau of Land Management released documents Thursday saying that Cadiz Inc.’s plan to repurpose 162 miles of the pipeline to transport water “will not significantly affect” the environment.
“We’re excited to achieve this pivotal milestone. After many years of planning and environmental review, the project has now reached the construction stage,” said Susan Kennedy, chair and chief executive of Cadiz.
Environmental advocates and leaders of Native tribes, who have been fighting the project, criticized the decision.
“This groundwater mining proposal would drain the desert and rob the Mojave of its rare springs and wildlife habitat,” said Chance Wilcox, California desert associate director of the National Parks Conservation Assn. “It’s indefensible that the Trump administration would once again try to revive the pointless Cadiz project, by defying decades of scientific warnings and refusing to conduct an environmental review of the groundwater mining.”
The application for the federal authorization was filed by the Fenner Gap Mutual Water Co. The documents say the company plans to build seven pump stations, three of them located on federal land managed by the agency.
The 30-inch steel pipeline runs underground from Cadiz’s desert property, near the town of Amboy, northward to the town of Mojave.
The BLM said in its authorization that repurposing the pipeline for water “would comply with all applicable statutes and regulations.” The agency said it has “reasonably determined that the impacts of groundwater withdrawal associated with Cadiz’s groundwater extraction project are outside the scope of analysis.”
Cadiz’s attempts to export water from its property 200 miles east of Los Angeles have drawn controversy for decades.
In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation that requires the project to undergo scientific study and gain approval from the State Lands Commission before it can take water from the Mojave and sell it to California cities.
Activists opposing the company’s plans include civil rights leader Dolores Huerta.
“Cadiz spells destruction for water, sacred lands, and the desert economy,” Huerta said in a statement. “It is exactly this type of greed and injustice that I have dedicated my life to oppose.”
Leaders of nearby tribes have also objected to Cadiz’s plans to pump from the desert aquifer near the Mojave Trails National Monument and Mojave National Preserve.
“It is the living heart of the desert,” said Daniel Leivas, chairman of the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe. “To drain it would be to drain the life out of the entire desert. No profit is worth such desecration.”
Chairman Timothy Williams of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe said the company’s plan “to pump and sell 25 times more groundwater each year than the aquifer can replenish would desecrate our traditional territories.”
“Pumping more groundwater than is sustainably replenished is not only negligent, but dangerous to the American Desert Southwest,” he said in the joint statement with other opponents of the project.
For years, while pursuing its plan to sell water far away, the company has been using wells on its property to irrigate nearly 2,000 acres of farmland growing lemons, grapes and other crops. It has drilled more wells in anticipation of being able to export water once the government approved its pipeline.
The company intends to pipe water to communities in San Bernardino County and says it’s “expected to provide one of the lowest-cost sources of new water in the drought-plagued Southwest.” It says the federal permit “marks a key milestone as we finalize project financing with prospective investors.”
Cadiz bought the 220-mile pipeline from El Paso Natural Gas in 2020. Once construction is completed, the company says the pipeline will be able to transport up to 25,000 acre-feet of water per year — about 5% of what Los Angeles uses each year.
The Los Angeles-based corporation is also seeking to build a new pipeline along a railroad right-of-way to transport water to the south.
Environmental groups have repeatedly filed lawsuits challenging the project.
Ileene Anderson, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, called the Trump administration’s decision “a green light for environmental destruction.”
She said six of the proposed pumping stations slated to be built are in the habitat of desert tortoises, a species in decline.
“We’ve successfully fended off this project before and we’ll continue to fight to stop this zombie from coming back,” Anderson said.
In 2021, the Biden administration reversed a Trump administration decision that had cleared the way for Cadiz to pipe water across public land. In 2022, a federal judge scrapped the pipeline permit that the Trump administration had issued.
But during President Trump’s second term, the company has again made headway on its plans. In February, Cadiz announced that the federal Environmental Protection Agency had invited it to submit an application for a $194-million low-interest loan for the northern pipeline project.
The company said in May that it reached an agreement with the federal Bureau of Reclamation to provide funding for a review of its potential role in “augmenting water supplies” along the shrinking Colorado River.
The company has also been lobbying the Trump administration. The group Public Citizen said in a recent report that Cadiz, through its nonprofit Fenner Gap Mutual Water Co., enlisted former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s new lobbying firm, the Bernhardt Group, and has spent at least $330,000 on lobbying in 2025 and 2026.
Records show lobbyist Luke Johnson has repeatedly accompanied Kennedy at meetings with Interior Department officials.
“The extensive influence of David Bernhardt’s boutique lobbying firm on the agency he formerly led highlights how insider firms staffed with former Trump officials have grown in recent years,” said Alan Zibel, a research director with Public Citizen. He said Bernhardt and his lobbyists “have learned how to master influence-peddling in the anything-goes era of Trump 2.0.”
Earlier this month, an Arizona water agency announced it signed an initial “memorandum of understanding” agreement to buy up to 10,000 acre-feet of water per year from Cadiz’s Mojave Groundwater Bank. The Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District provides water to farmlands in Pinal County, where growers are dealing with water cutbacks.
The company said that for this to happen, it would need to build pipelines and reach deals to exchange water across state lines.
Members of California’s congressional delegation have raised concerns. In a recent letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla called for a thorough environmental review, saying that federal agencies and peer-reviewed scientific analyses have “warned of the significant and irreversible impacts that Cadiz’s project could have on federal lands and surrounding communities.”
Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) said in a letter to Burgum that he is concerned about the company’s long-standing effort to extract and export groundwater.
“The area I represent cannot afford to absorb the long-term costs of a commercially driven groundwater export scheme,” Ruiz said.
Politics
Trump Promotes ‘Freedom Fuel’ Gas Stations as Gas Prices Rise Again
President Trump has promoted a chain of newly rebranded gas stations across the Philadelphia area with lower gas prices. The New York Times has not been able to get detailed information about who is behind the stations. The Trump administration says it did not fund or subsidize the company.
-
Wisconsin2 minutes agoQuiotepec en Wisconsin brings Oaxacan basketball fever to the Midwest
-
West Virginia7 minutes agoWest Virginia DEP seeks details on Peoples Cartage fire cleanup, lawsuit filed on behalf of residents
-
Wyoming14 minutes agoResidents celebrate Wyoming Statehood Day by revealing their favorite thing about the Cowboy State
-
Crypto17 minutes ago
Trump’s crypto grift spins into its own industry
-
Finance29 minutes agoNew changes to financial aid will be minor for UND students, bigger for loan borrowers in repayment
-
Fitness32 minutes agoThe NHS has reignited the hybrid working debate – but WFH isn’t the health risk, this is
-
Movie Reviews44 minutes ago‘Only Beautiful Things to Look At’ Review: A Handsome but Muffled Portrait of State-Sanctioned Cruelty
-
World52 minutes agoColombia Adds Massive Soundstage as Bogotá Audiovisual Market Attendance Soars and ‘Narcos’ Star-Led ‘Rookies’ Cleans Up in Project Prizes