Graffiti of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is seen on a steel beam in the Elmhurst neighborhood of the borough of Queens in New York City, U.S., March 17, 2025. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton/File Photo
Trump Administration Defends Use of War Powers for Venezuelan Migrant Deportations
Trump administration officials on Sunday defended their decision to use extraordinary war powers to deport 137 Venezuelan migrants, despite a federal judge blocking the move and Venezuela disputing U.S. claims that the deportees were gang members.
Justification for Deportations Under Wartime Law
Attorney General Pam Bondi, speaking on Fox News Sunday Morning Futures, described the deportations as necessary for national security. “It’s modern-day warfare, and we are going to continue to fight that and protect American citizens every single step of the way,” Bondi said.
The administration invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, a wartime law, arguing that the deported individuals were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which Washington has designated as a terrorist organization. White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz further claimed on CBS’ Face the Nation that the gang was acting as a proxy for Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, accusing Maduro of deliberately releasing prisoners to infiltrate the U.S.
“The Alien Sedition Act fully applies because we have also determined that this group is acting as a proxy of the Maduro regime,” Waltz said. “Maduro is deliberately emptying his prisons in a proxy manner to influence an attack on the United States.”
Venezuela and Advocates Deny U.S. Allegations
Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello rejected the U.S. allegations, stating that none of the deported individuals were affiliated with Tren de Aragua. Relatives and immigration advocates have also denied any links between the deportees and the gang.
The deportations were carried out last weekend, with the migrants sent to El Salvador, rather than Venezuela, due to strained diplomatic relations between Washington and Caracas.
Judicial Challenges and Constitutional Concerns
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg had issued an order temporarily blocking the administration from using the Alien Enemies Act for deportations. However, despite the ruling, two flights carrying Venezuelan migrants were not recalled.
On Friday, Boasberg stated that he would further investigate whether the administration had violated his order. He has set a March 25 deadline for the Trump administration to provide additional details regarding the deportations.
Legal scholars have raised concerns that this case could escalate tensions between the executive and judicial branches, with some warning of a potential constitutional crisis.
Administration’s Response to Legal Challenges
Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, acknowledged on ABC News’ This Week that the administration would comply with Boasberg’s order but emphasized that enforcement actions against migrants deemed a security threat would continue.
“We’re going to continue to arrest public safety threats and national security threats,” Homan said. “We will keep targeting the worst of the worst.”
Meanwhile, Bondi criticized Boasberg, accusing him of overstepping his authority and interfering with the administration’s foreign policy.
“This is an out-of-control judge, a federal judge trying to control our entire foreign policy,” she said.
During a Friday hearing, Boasberg expressed concern over the language used by government lawyers in defending the deportations, though he did not specify what he found objectionable.
Bondi also extended her criticism to other federal judges, claiming that they were deliberately obstructing Trump’s policies.
“We are in court every day, fighting against these activist judges. We’re not going to stop. Many of them should be recused from these cases,” she said. “They will be recused from these cases.”
As the legal battle continues, the case highlights the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and the judiciary over immigration enforcement and executive authority.
COMMENTS