A court ruling that challenges immigration policy
A federal judge just slapped the US government in the face. James Boasberg, of the District of Washington, ordered this Thursday that authorities organize and pay for the return of Venezuelan migrants who were deported to a prison in El Salvador.
The case is the tip of the iceberg of the Trump administration’s immigration offensive. It all started in March, when the president invoked an 18th century law—the Foreign Enemies Law—to send these men to the so-called Terrorism Confinement Center (CEcot).
“They told the court to go to hell”
The juiciest thing comes in the words of the judge himself. Boasberg harshly criticized the government’s initial response to his previous order:
“Apparently uninterested in participating in this process, the government’s responses essentially told the court to go to hell.”
The White House did not remain silent. His spokeswoman, Abigail Jackson, lashed out at what she called “an absurd and illegal ruling by a far-left judicial activist.” He said he is trying to undermine the president’s legal authority to carry out deportations.
The 137 men were already returned to Venezuela in an exchange negotiated by the US. But some have managed to leave and are now in a third country. His attorney, Lee Gelernt, says they want to clear his name.
What happens now?
The order is clear: the government must give them a boarding bill and pay for their tickets if they want to return. Of course, they will be detained upon arrival.
They can also present new documents to argue that their deportation was illegal and that they were wrongly labeled as members of the Tren de Aragua gang.
Boasberg made the substance of the matter clear:
“Otherwise, the government could simply remove people from the United States without providing any process… and then deny them any right to return.”
There is a shady background. In March, officials transferred the men despite a verbal order from the judge for the plane to turn around. That sparked a contempt investigation, although it has been paused.
Gelernt summed it up like this:
“Notably, although the government does not dispute that the men were denied due process, it was still unwilling to do the right thing without a court order.”
This case is more than a legal dispute. It is a battle between powers about how far the executive can go in its fight against irregular migration. And meanwhile, there are dozens of lives on hold awaiting justice.
