Supreme Court News Could Be ‘Game Over’ for Democrats: CNN
In a legal battle challenging the Trump administration’s authority to deport Venezuelan nationals under a wartime statute from 1798, a federal appellate court declined to overturn the rulings of a lower court.
Efforts to advance the Trump administration’s deportation policies faced another setback when a panel of three judges ruled 2-1 in favor of the plaintiffs, further delaying enforcement.
Judges Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett, and Justin Walker of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals presided over oral arguments on Monday. The court had agreed the previous week to hear the case on an expedited basis.
Millett, appointed by former President Obama, sided with the plaintiffs and engaged in extensive discussion during Monday’s proceedings. She debated with Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign over whether the administration had violated constitutional due process rights by potentially failing to provide those targeted for deportation with sufficient time to seek habeas protections. She also questioned how the administration was implementing the statute in question.
An appeal from the Trump administration is almost certain.
During a CNN panel discussion, a legal analyst suggested that if the case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, it could have significant political consequences for Democrats.
Xochitl Hinojosa, a former Public Affairs Director for the Department of Justice, remarked, “This has been an unprecedented case from the beginning. The reality is, is that what the D.C. circuit is ruling on is a very technical matter. They’re not ruling on the Alien Enemies Act. They’re actually ruling when it comes to a fight between Judge Boasberg and the Department of Justice. Justice, the Department of Justice and the administration, they used a statute from the 18th century.”
“And essentially the judge said, hold on, wait a minute, issued a tro and said, I need some more information on this. This hasn’t been used in a long time. I would like some more information. The Justice Department stonewalled and instead they ended up filing this appeal that is now at the D.C. Circuit. So it is very process-oriented. I would say, as a general matter, no, I don’t think the Justice Department would be successful. But given how everything in this matter has been unprecedented, from the calling to impeach the judge to everyone from their Department of Justice leadership, signing on to these filings, which never happens, it’s clear that there is a lot of politics being played here, and it’s unclear where that last judge is going to rule,” she elaborated.
“And it really could all come down to that then. Then of course, Mark, depending on how that goes, if Trump wins, then that’s a victory in this one specific sense, right. Not not overall. But I mean is his bet. Mark is his hope that this eventually all goes to the Supreme Court, right?” host Erin Burnett inquired.
“That’s where they want it to end up. The Trump administration wants to have more power and more ability to conduct deportations with a minimal amount of judicial oversight. And that’s where it is,” responded Marc Caputo, a senior reporter at Axios.
“The Trump administration believes that the law is on their side and the court’s composition ultimately at the Supreme Court is also on their side. That is, the number of Republicans appointed Justices outnumber that of Democrats. And to them, those two factors are essentially the ballgame,” Caputo added.
Speaking to Fox News, Attorney General Pam Bondi strongly criticized lower court judges for interfering in immigration matters. She also vowed to take the case to the Supreme Court if necessary.
“This is an out-of-control judge, a federal judge, trying to control our entire foreign policy, and he cannot do it,” Bondi stated, referring to the lower court rulings.