El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele recently received praise from former President Donald Trump for accepting 261 deportees from the United States. Among those deported were members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, which has been linked to criminal activities. A video shared on social media shows the deportees being escorted from the plane to their cells in El Salvador.
This video surfaced shortly after Trump issued a proclamation using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, aimed at addressing the threat posed by the Tren de Aragua gang. This law allows the president to detain or deport non-citizens from enemy nations during times of war or invasion, based solely on their nationality.
Critics argue that applying this law in the current situation is unusual and raises concerns about due process. A federal judge, James Boasberg, ordered a halt to deportation flights, which has led to accusations of judicial overreach. Chief Justice John Roberts has publicly opposed calls to impeach the judge, emphasizing the need for respect for judicial authority.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the administration’s actions, stating that the president’s powers in foreign affairs and immigration are well-established. She asserted that a single judge should not have the authority to dictate the actions of the executive branch regarding national security.
Luis Atencio, a Venezuelan-American political analyst, expressed concern over the deportations, questioning whether all those deported were indeed criminals. He highlighted the case of Francisco Javier García, a barber who was wrongfully identified as a gang member and deported due to his tattoos, despite having a clean record.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio responded to these concerns by emphasizing that all deportees were in the U.S. illegally and that the Salvadoran government could handle any individuals who might not belong to the gang.
Daniel DiMartino, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, pointed out the potential dangers of using the Alien Enemies Act, suggesting it could lead to wrongful deportations without evidence of criminal activity.
Supporters of the president’s actions, like Simon Hankinson from the Heritage Foundation, argue that the current situation justifies strong measures. They believe that the administration is fulfilling its promise to address illegal immigration and maintain border security.
Hankinson also noted that the legal landscape has changed, with presidents often facing lawsuits over their actions. He expressed concern about lower court judges making sweeping decisions that could limit executive authority.
In the face of ongoing debates about the threat posed by gangs like Tren de Aragua, supporters and critics alike are grappling with the implications of these deportations and the broader impact on immigration policy. As the situation unfolds, questions about due process and the balance of power in immigration enforcement remain at the forefront of public discussion.