Late on Monday, the Trump administration requested that the Supreme Court reverse its ban on deporting roughly 200 Cuban nationals, citing a worrying increase at a Texas detention facility involving alleged gang members.
The Justice Department’s Solicitor General, D. John Sauer, pleaded in an emergency filing to the great court to allow the government to continue persecution under the 18th-century military act, the Alien Enemies Act, which the management is enforcing to speed up the removal of foreign citizens who are accused of threatening national protection.
The imprisoned migrants, according to Sauer, the second highest-ranking official in the Trump Justice Department, are allegedly linked to the Cuban gang Tren de Aragua, which has been designated by American authorities as a foreign terrorist organization.
In the processing, Sauer noted that” some prisoners have demonstrated to be particularly dangerous to sustain.” This includes a new incident in which 23 workers barricaded themselves inside a housing complex and threatened to kill ICE agents.
According to the DOJ, which cited a sworn declaration from a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official, the incident took place at the Bluebonnet Detention Facility in Anson, Texas, where a Department of Homeland Security area officer claimed prisoners refused to follow commands and caused a significant security upheaval that lasted several days.
The detainees were ultimately relocated to the Prairieland Detention Center due to the security threat they posed, according to the sworn declaration from ICE official Joshua Johnson. Johnson argued that the detainee misconduct’s organized and coordinated nature threatened the organization’s security, safety, and order.
Sauer argued that the government’s ability to detain the migrants safely is declining, and that deportations under traditional Title 8 immigration law should be allowed to proceed right away.
He wrote that moving these prisoners to other facilities” creates ongoing risks of prison recruitment and the expansion of Tren de Aragua gang activities in the United States.” The government must now pursue removal under supervision of organizations other than the AEA because of the difficulty in holding the putative class members.
Deportations under the AEA were suspended until a temporary injunction was issued last month by the Supreme Court. The administration has argued that the high court’s ruling should be at least narrowed down so that it only applies to removals made under the AEA and not to any other statutory deportation tools.
Sauer claimed that none of the migrants have filed habeas corpus petitions in federal court during the three-week injunction period and that they have received “adequate notice” of the government’s intention to deport them.
The three weeks spent here are more than adequate, Sauer wrote. No members of the putative class who have been given notice of removal under the AEA have filed habeas petitions in the Northern District of Texas while the administrative injunction has remained in effect, as far as the government is aware.
Lower courts are divided over whether migrant detainees can jointly challenge their removals under the AEA, according to the government’s filing.
Two Texas federal judges, both appointed by President Donald Trump, recently reached different conclusions regarding class certification. In the Northern District, U.S. District Judge James Hendrix disputed class status, citing the highly individualized nature of the allegations, including gang-related and asylum-related differences. However, in a separate case, Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. in the Southern District granted class certification, citing the more effective course of action given the frequently asked legal questions. Due to the split, there is more legal uncertainty and the 5th Circuit is almost certain to hear the case.
The Trump administration started calling on the AEA earlier this year to make certain foreign nationals more deported, especially those who are connected to gangs or terrorist organizations. The executive branch is authorized by the law, which dates back to 1798, to quickly remove nationals from enemy countries during times of conflict.
Civil liberties organizations and advocates for immigration have fiercely criticized the policy, arguing that it lacks due process and opens the door to mass deportations without individualized assessments.
Lower courts have so far rendered inconsistent legal decisions regarding the policy. Rodriguez is one of the federal judges who has temporarily blocked its use, while the Supreme Court has allowed the administration to proceed in a limited manner as long as detainees are given “adequate” notice and a chance to challenge their removal, a vague legal requirement that has been a source of contention by the government in recent hearings.
TRUMP JUDGES ARE SPLIT OVER GROUPE DEPORTATION CASES INDIVIDUALLY OR INDIVIDUALLY HANDLING
The Supreme Court has not yet responded to the government’s request, and its attorneys have not yet submitted a response.
The American Civil Liberties Union, a civil rights organization representing the migrants, contacted an attorney for The Washington Examiner.
