A US appeals court judge has sparked controversy by claiming that Nazis during World War II had more legal rights in the United States than Venezuelan migrants deported under Donald Trump’s administration.
During a tense hearing on Monday, US Circuit Judge Patricia Millett challenged government attorney Drew Ensign on whether Venezuelans expelled under a rarely invoked 18th-century law had a fair chance to contest their alleged gang affiliations before being removed.
“Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemies Act than has happened here,” Millett stated, drawing an immediate response from Ensign.
“We certainly dispute the Nazi analogy,” the government lawyer replied, defending the administration’s actions.
Rarely used law revived for mass deportations
The Trump administration relied on the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, a law that had only been invoked three times in US history. Most notably, it was used during World War II to justify the internment and deportation of Japanese, German, and Italian immigrants.
The government is now appealing a ruling by US District Judge James Boasberg, who on March 15 temporarily blocked the use of the Act to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. The ruling determined that migrants must have a chance to challenge accusations before being forcibly removed from the US.
Many deported Venezuelans have denied any gang connections. One high-profile case involves a Venezuelan professional footballer and youth coach who was allegedly misidentified as a gang member due to a crown tattoo— which he insists is simply a tribute to his favourite football club, Real Madrid.
Trump calls for judge’s impeachment
Following Judge Boasberg’s decision to halt deportations, Trump called for his impeachment— a move that, if successful, would remove the judge from office.
The call triggered an unusual public response from US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who criticised Trump’s comments, stating that legal disputes should be handled through appeals, not threats of impeachment.
‘Hustled onto planes’
Trump and his legal team have insisted that the judiciary is overstepping its role. During Monday’s hearing, government lawyer Drew Ensign urged the appeals court to suspend Boasberg’s ruling, arguing that presidential authority on foreign affairs should not be questioned.
However, Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) representing the Venezuelan migrants, argued that national security concerns do not justify denying migrants basic legal rights.
Boasberg’s ruling rejected the Trump administration’s request to lift the two-week deportation freeze, reaffirming that deportees must be given a chance to challenge their alleged gang ties.
The judge also accused the administration of potentially violating his order by continuing deportations even after the ban was issued.
“The administration appeared to have ‘hustled people onto those planes’ to avoid a potential court order blocking their removal,” Boasberg wrote in his ruling.
Venezuelan migrants detained in El Salvador’s notorious prison
On March 15, the Trump administration deported over 200 Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador, where they were detained in the country’s notorious anti-terrorism prison. The deportations were part of a $6 million agreement between Washington and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, under which El Salvador agreed to hold the migrants on behalf of the US.
More Read
Judge Boasberg’s ruling currently protects five specific plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, as well as other Venezuelan migrants in the US who could be targeted under the Alien Enemies Act. However, it does not apply to those who have already been deported to El Salvador.
The ACLU is now pushing for their return, arguing that if the deportations were carried out in defiance of Boasberg’s order, the migrants should be allowed back into the US.
Among those deported were at least eight Venezuelan women and a Nicaraguan man, who were reportedly flown to El Salvador but later rejected by Salvadoran authorities and sent back to the US.
In a sworn statement, one Venezuelan woman described hearing a US immigration official discussing an order that should have prevented their flight from taking off— while she was already in the air.
What happens next?
The case has reignited the debate over immigration policies under Trump’s presidency, with critics condemning the use of the Alien Enemies Act for mass deportations.
Legal experts warn that if the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rules in favour of the administration, it could set a dangerous precedent, making it easier for future governments to deport migrants without due process.
For now, the fate of hundreds of deported Venezuelans remains uncertain.
