In Thursday’s decision, U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. became the first judge to rule that the 18th-century law can’t be used to justify removing people for alleged criminal activity. Earlier this year, Trump declared that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was invading the country, then invoked the act to bypass court hearings for people it accused of being members of the criminal organization.
In his 36-page decision, Rodriguez — a Trump appointee — said the administration had twisted the meaning of the AEA. The act is only intended to apply to people from a hostile foreign nation when the United States is either at war or under direct military attack, he maintained.
“The President’s invocation of the AEA through the Proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and, as a result, is unlawful,” Rodriguez wrote.
The Trump White House last month used the act to justify its deportation of around 140 Venezuelans from the El Valle Detention Center in the South Texas town of Raymondville. Lawyers for the men sued, arguing they never had the chance to dispute the White House’s claims that they’re Tren de Aragua members.
The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month ruled the administration can’t use the AEA to remove migrants without first allowing them “reasonable time” to contest charges. Since then, federal judges in other states have issued restraining orders to block similar deportations under the act.
During World War Two, the U.S. used the AEA to forcibly relocate and incarcerate 120,000 people of Japanese descent. After subsequent court rulings and investigations the federal government during the 1990s disbursed $1.6 million reparations to Japanese Americans caught up in the internment.
Subscribe to SA Current newsletters.
Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed
This article appears in Apr 30 – May 13, 2025.

