US President Donald Trump has defended his decision to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century wartime law last used during World War II, to deport individuals allegedly linked to Venezuela's Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang.
Trump's remarks came as a federal court in Washington ordered the administration to submit written arguments — setting the stage for a high-stakes legal showdown in the US over whether a president can unilaterally expel non-citizens without due process.
The unprecedented move — framing a foreign criminal group as an "invading force" to justify mass deportations — has drawn fierce legal and political backlash.
Within hours of Trump's order on Saturday, US District Judge James E Boasberg blocked deportations for two weeks, prompting an immediate appeal from the Justice Department.
The Alien Enemies Act, a relic of 18th-century wartime policy, was crafted during the looming spectre of war with France in 1798. It has only been used three times in US history — during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II — as part of the legal justification for the mass internment of Japanese Americans.
'Defend the US from threats and invasions'
Trump's invocation of the act in a time of peace has raised serious constitutional concerns, experts say. The measure allows non-citizens to be detained and deported without the opportunity to challenge their removal before an immigration or federal judge — a stark departure from conventional legal protections.
On Friday night, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Democracy Forward filed an emergency lawsuit in Washington, DC, on behalf of five Venezuelan men detained at an immigration center in Texas.
By Saturday, Judge Boasberg blocked their deportation, dealing the administration an immediate legal setback. The Justice Department swiftly appealed the ruling.
The case will now hinge on whether Trump's order stretches the 1798 statute beyond its original wartime context — an argument that legal experts say could set a dangerous precedent.
Trump's executive order classified TdA as an "invading force," framing the gang as a paramilitary entity engaged in "irregular warfare" on US soil.
"By invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, I will direct our government to use the full and immense power of federal and state law enforcement to eliminate the presence of all foreign gangs and criminal networks bringing devastating crime to US soil," Trump declared in his executive proclamation.
"As commander in chief, I have no higher responsibility than to defend our country from threats and invasions."
Yet, the Brennan Center for Justice, a New York University School of Law that works to ensure US laws and institutions uphold democracy and equal justice, swiftly condemned the move as an "unprecedented abuse" of presidential power, arguing that the law was never intended to apply to non-state actors like criminal gangs.
"Invoking it in peacetime to bypass conventional immigration law is a staggering violation of due process," the organisation said.
Amidst the censures, an agreement between the Trump administration and El Salvador has surfaced. The central American nation has agreed to imprison 300 alleged members of TdA for a year.
The deal follows discussions between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele about detaining deported migrants in El Salvador's prisons called CECOT — facilities that have drawn widespread condemnation for human rights abuses.
Last month, the Trump administration formally designated TdA and seven other Latin American criminal groups as "foreign terrorist organisations."
TRT Global - Donald Trump's administration goes against the order of a district judge, evoking a 18th century wartime declaration which has been used only three times in US history.
Legal precedents and battles ahead
The Congressional Research Service, a public policy research institute of the US Congress, said in a report last month that officials may use the foreign terrorist designations to argue the gang's activities in the US amount to a limited invasion.
"This theory appears to be unprecedented and has not been subject to judicial review," the report stated.
In a new filing late on the TdA case, the plaintiffs have accused the Trump administration of violating the judge's order, alleging that the court had made it clear any planes in the air at the time the order was issued should return to the US.
In the motion filed on Sunday night, the plaintiffs requested "that the Court immediately direct the government to submit one or more sworn declarations from individuals with direct knowledge of the facts clarifying" the timing of the flights.
On Monday, a federal judge in Washington delved into the question of whether the Trump administration violated an order he issued on Saturday barring officials from removing any detained non-citizens.
With the Supreme Court poised to eventually weigh in, the bigger question looms: Can a president unilaterally use wartime powers in peacetime?
