President Donald Trump’s use of the alien enemies to deport more than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members is an “incredibly cumbersome and problematic” application of centuries-old war law, US district judge James Boasberg said during a hearing Friday in his strongest correction to date of Trump administration’s deportation.
Trump last Saturday, the alien enema laws called a wartime authority used to deport non-citizens with a little-to-no-proper process-by claiming that the Venezuelan gang TREN DE ARAGUA is a “hybrid criminal state” invading the United States
“I agree that the political consequences of this are incredibly troublesome and problematic and about, and I agree that it is an unprecedented and expanded use of an act that has been used … in the war in 1812, the World War and 2nd World War, when there was no doubt that there was a declaration of war and who was the enemy,” said Boasberg.
The judge noted that the Trump administration’s arguments about the extent of the president’s powers are “terribly scary” and a “long way from” the intention of the law.
He also promised to hold the Trump administration liable if needed if they violated his court decision last weekend, which blocked the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport the Venezuelan migrants.
“The government is not very cooperative at this time, but I come to the bottom of whether they violated my word and who ordered this and what is the consequence,” he said.
When Boasberg asked if DOJ could promise that the Trump administration would hold individual hearings before they deported anyone under AEA to confirm that they are members of Tren de Aragua, Deputy Assistant Attorney Drew Ensign refused to make this commitment.
Alleged members of the Venezuelan criminal organization TREN de Aragua, deported by the US government, are detained at Terrorism -Insection Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador in a photo obtained Mar. 16, 2025.
Secretaria de Prensa de la Presentencia via AFP via Getty Images
“No, your honor, I don’t have permission to do it,” he said.
Boasberg completed the consultation without giving any decision from the bench.
Earlier during the hearing, Judge Timing and the motive behind the Trump administration’s “rushed” deportations last weekend, which took place despite Boasberg ordering they turned around two aircraft, as the administration said, deported alleged wandering gang members to El Salvador. Officials couldn’t turn the planes around saying they were already in international waters when they got the order, according to sources.
Ensign confirmed to Boasberg during Friday’s consultation that he understood the judge’s at. 18.45 Oral Directive to turn both flights around and convey it to the immigration authorities, apparently undermined arguments from the Ministry of Justice earlier this week about the time of the order.
“Can I ask you now how you interpreted that statement when we had a conversation Saturday?” Judge Boasberg asked. “Didn’t you understand my statement during this consultation?”
“I understood your statements and forwarded your directive to the clients that I have done,” said Ensign.
“What did you understand? Did you know it was hypothetical, not seriously that it would be changed? Or did you understand it when I said did it right away?” Judge Boasberg asked.
“I understood your intention – that you thought it was effective to be effective at the time,” said Ensign, and seems to undermine DOJ’s arguments.
Judge Boasberg also raised concerns about the time of Trump’s proclamation, which relied on the Alien Enemies Act, which suggested it was “signed in the dark” to rush the deportations before anyone could bring a legal challenge.
“Why is this proclamation essentially signed in the dark Friday night, early Saturday morning when people rushed on the plane?” Judge Boasberg asked. “For me, the only reason to do it if you know the problem and you will get them out of the country before a case is brought.”
“I don’t know about these operational details,” Ensign said.
Judge Boasberg also raised concern that the rushed deportations prevented the men from being able to challenge the claim they belonged to TREN DE Aragua.
“They simply say, don’t remove me, especially to a country that will torture me,” Boasberg said.
As Ensign seems to undermine arguments made earlier this week about the time of the order and continue to fight to answer Judge Boasberg’s questions, the judge suggested that DOJ may have risked his reputation and credibility with his recent behavior.
“I often tell my officials before going out into the world to practice law, the most valuable tax they possess is their reputation and their credibility,” Boasberg said. “I just beg you to make sure your team [understands] that lesson. “
Trump is the first president since World War II using the Alien Enemies Act and the first president to use it against a non-governmental actor.
An official with the US immigration and customs enforcement recognized in a sworn statement earlier this week that “many” of the non -citizens who were deported last weekend under the Alien enemy law did not have criminal items in the United States.
Trump, asked by ABC News’ Karen Travers on Friday during an oval office pressures, if he thinks he has the authority to end people and deport them without having to show the evidence against them, replied, “That’s what the law says and that’s what our country needs.”
“You can’t take it away from the people who are responsible,” Trump said. “And you can’t stop it with a judge sitting behind a bench that has no idea what’s going on.”
“They are bad people,” Trump said of the alleged beds of the allegedly, while criticizing the boundary policy of the Biden administration. “We don’t want them in our country. We can’t let a judge say he wants them. You know he didn’t run as president. … I won on the basis of getting criminals out of our country.”
Friday’s hearing is coming as officials at the Cabinet Level in Trump administration are considering invoking the state secrets of the privilege to prevent the disclosure of information on last week’s deportations, according to sworn archiving from vice lawyer Todd Blanche.
The Trump administration has until March 25 to confirm whether they invoke state secrets of privilege to prevent the disclosure of deportation flight information based on national security concerns.
Elizabeth Goitein, Senior Director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the NonProfit Brennan Center for Justice, said the Trump administration’s potential use of state secrets privilege could revive a decades of old conflict over the role of the legal branch in national security issues.
Alleged members of the Venezuelan criminal organization TREN de Aragua, deported by the US government, are detained at Terrorism -Insection Center in Tecoluca, El Salvador in a photo obtained Mar. 16, 2025.
Secretaria de Prensa de la Presentencia via AFP via Getty Images
If Judge Boasberg accepts the Trump administration’s argument that giving more information about the deportations risks national security, it can move for evidence from the table and potentially sideline legal cases related to removal, Goitein said.
But the Trump administration has to prove the risk of Boasberg, who will make the decision on whether the privilege is applicable.
“The president cannot simply say the words ‘National Security’ and close the courts when it comes to their review of things like deportations according to the Alien Enemies Act,” Goitein told ABC News.
To demonstrate that the privilege must use, the head of the Agency, who has the relevant information, must submit evidence or swore declarations that prove that the publication of information would risk national security.
“It’s really up to the judge,” Gooitein said. “The judge will look at the statements or statements filed by the government and will determine whether these documents on their face state that the state’s secrets privilege apply to the information.”
However, the Trump administration has so far claimed that not even Judge Boasberg has the right to know more about the deportations. In submissions and Court Minister this week, DOJ -Attorneys have claimed that the question exceeds Boasberg’s jurisdiction – although federal judges have the authority to review classified information in closed environments, according to Goitein.
If the Trump administration continues to stone the judge, it is unlikely that it is unlikely to invoke the privilege to prevent the postings publishing, according to Goitein.
“It seems that the government is already claiming from Get-Go that the Court should not have this information, whether they ever come to the lawsuits or whether it will ever become public. It is not a valid claim,” she said.
Goitein noted that the trial of deportations can continue, while Judge Boasberg is taking up the state’s secret arguments and the case may continue even if that privilege is allowed by the judge. The use of state secrets privilege would wall of certain evidence and materials – some of which may be necessary to prove the Trump administration, which potentially threatened the court’s order – but the overall case of the legitimacy of the deportations may be able to continue, she said.
“This information that the judge has requested is less about the trial that the applicants filed … and more about whether the government complied with the court’s order to stop any deportations,” she said.
