Alito 對驅逐移民案件發出異議, 指法院在半夜匆忙通過命令阻止特朗普的行動 (1/2)

 Recently Yahoo News on-line picked up the following:

Alito's dissent in deportation case says court rushed to block Trump with middle-of-the night order (1/2)

Sun, April 20, 2025 at 6:55 a.m. PDT·4 min read

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court acted “literally in the middle of the night” and without sufficient explanation in blocking the Trump administration from deporting any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under an 18th-century wartime law, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a sharp dissent that castigated the seven-member majority.

Joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, Alito said there was “dubious factual support” for granting the request in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union. The group contended that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart such removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The majority did not provide a detailed explanation in the order early Saturday, as is typical, but the court previously said deportations could proceed only after those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

“Both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law,” Alito said in the dissent released hours after the court’s intervention against Republican President Donald Trump’s administration.

The justices’ brief order directed the administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Alito said that “unprecedented” relief was “hastily and prematurely granted.”

He wrote that it was not clear whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction at this stage of the case, saying that not all legal avenues had been played out in lower courts and the justices had not had the chance to hear the government's side.

“The only papers before this Court were those submitted by the applicants. The Court had not ordered or received a response by the Government regarding either the applicants’ factual allegations or any of the legal issues presented by the application. And the Court did not have the benefit of a Government response filed in any of the lower courts either,” Alito said.

(to be continued)

Translation

Alito 對驅逐移民案件發出異議, 指法院在半夜匆忙通過命令阻止特朗普的行動 (1/2)

華盛頓（美聯社）— 大法官 Samuel Alito 在一份尖銳的異議中嚴厲譴責了法院七人的多數派, 指最高法院「實質上是在半夜」採取行動，及沒有充分解釋要阻止特朗普政府根據 18 世紀戰時法律去驅逐關押在德克薩斯州北的委內瑞拉人。

Alito 與同為保守派的大法官 Clarence Thomas 一同表示，美國公民自由聯盟 (American Civil Liberties Union) 在緊急呼籲中要批准該請求是基於「不明確事實依據」。這聯盟聲稱，移民當局似乎正準備根據 1798 年《敵對外國人法》重新啟動此類驅逐行動。

週六早上，多數派像往常一樣, 沒有在其命令中提供詳細解釋，但法院此前表示，只有在那些即將被驅逐出境的人有機會在法庭上為自己辯護，並有 “合理的時間” 對即將被驅逐的決定提出異議後，才能被驅逐出境。

在法院干預共和黨總統特朗普政府數小時後所發佈的異議中，Alito 表示： “行政部門和司法部門都有義務遵守法律。”

法官的簡短命令指示政府「在法院另行命令之前」不得遣返關押在 Bluebonnet 拘留中心的委內瑞拉人。

Alito 表示，這項「史無前例」的緊急批准是「倉促且過早的」。

他寫道，目前尚不清楚最高法院在案件的這個階段是否擁有管轄權，並表示並非所有在下級法院的法律途徑都得到運用，法官們還沒有機會聽取政府的意見。

Alito 表示： “本法院收到的唯一文件是申請人提交的文件。法院尚未下令,或收到政府就申請人的事實指控或申請中提出的任何法律問題作出回應。而且，法院也沒有收到政府在任何下級法院提交的回應。”

（未完待續）

Note:

1. As of May 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States comprises nine justices: one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas are among the Associate Justices. The number of justices has remained unchanged since the Judiciary Act of 1869. (ChatGPT)

2. The American Civil Liberties Union (美國公民自由聯盟) (ACLU) is an American nonprofit civil rights organization founded in 1920. The ACLU provides legal assistance in cases where it considers civil liberties at risk. (Wikipedia)

3. The ACLU's lawsuit, W.M.M. v. Trump was filed on April 16, 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to seek writs of habeas corpus for the detainees. The organization argued that the detainees were being denied due process rights, as they were not given adequate notice or the opportunity to contest their deportations. Many of these individuals were held at the Bluebonnet Detention Center in Anson, Texas, and faced imminent transfer to El Salvador.

On April 18, 2025, the ACLU requested an emergency temporary restraining order to prevent these deportations. Although the district court initially declined to issue the order, the ACLU escalated the matter to the Supreme Court. In a rare late-night decision on April 19, the Supreme Court issued a brief, unsigned order directing the government not to remove any of the purported class members until further notice. (ChatGPT)

4. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented from the U.S. Supreme Court order that temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelan migrants held at the Bluebonnet Detention Center in Texas. The order issued on April 19, 2025; the Supreme Court directed the administration not to remove any of the detainees "until further order of this court." Justice Alito later issued a written dissent, criticizing this Court's intervention as premature. He argued that the Court likely lacked jurisdiction to issue the order and that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated they were in imminent danger. Alito emphasized that both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law, suggesting that the Court's decision disrupted this balance. Justice Thomas joined in dissenting from the Court's order, although he did not author a separate opinion. Their dissent highlights a judicial perspective that cautions against rapid judicial intervention in executive immigration actions, especially when the legal and factual circumstances are still developing.  (ChatGPT)