Supreme Court: Liberal Judges Tried to Delay Alien Enemies Act

The Supreme Court’s majority torpedoed the organized legal campaign against President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants, according to the minority’s complaint posted on Monday evening.

“The majority’s rush to resolve the question is all the more troubling because this is not one of those rare cases in which the Court must immediately intervene “despite the risk” of error attendant in deciding novel legal questions on the emergency docket,” said the dissent supported by four female justices on the court.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissent, saying:

The Government may well prefer to defend against ‘300 or more individual habeas petitions [in various courts]’ than face this class … case in Washington [district courtrooms]. That is especially so because the Government can transfer detainees to particular locations in an attempt to secure a more hospitable judicial forum.

The court majority, however, argued their quick conclusion balances Presidential power with the need to let migrants argue in court that they are not covered by the act:

For all the rhetoric of the dissents, today’s [court] order and per curiam confirm that the detainees subject to removal orders under the AEA are entitled to notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal. The only question is which court will resolve that challenge. For the reasons set forth, we hold that venue lies in the district of confinement. The dissents would have the Court delay resolving that issue  [via lawsuits by pro-migration judges] , requiring—given our decision today—that the process begin anew down the road.

“We see no benefit in such wasteful delay,” the majority declared.

Trump’s deputies trumpeted their win: