Trump Administration Live Updates: Secret Service ask Comey about social media post about President

The Court said that his order would exist for the fifth circuit until the US Court of Appeal was obtained, and the Supreme Court tested an appeal against this judgment.

Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote a dissent and argued that the judges had no authority to hear the dispute at that time. He was accompanied by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The decision deals with the efforts of the Trump government to use the war law in order to pursue a quick persecution of Venezuelan migrants who are accused of being members of the gang, tren de Aragua.

It also indicates that the majority of judges may be skeptical whether the migrants were adequately protected by the administration before they are deported to a prison for terrorists in El Salvador.

In their order, the judges said that the missions that were opposite to the prisoners were “particularly important” and the case of a Maryland man, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, who was “deported” to El Salvador prison in March. So far, the Trump administration has said that despite an order from the judges, it cannot bring him back to “facilitate” his return.

Under such circumstances, the judges wrote: “Note about 24 hours before distance, without information about how the rights of procedural rights exercise the distance that is certainly not adopted.”

President Trump reacted to the judgment with anger. “The Supreme Court does not allow us to get criminals from our country!” He said on social media. In a subsequent article he wrote: “The Supreme Court of the United States does not allow me to do what I was chosen and called it” a bad and dangerous day for America “.

Migrants' lawyers reacted with relief.

The decision “means that more people are not being secretly sent to a brutal prison in El Salvador,” said Lee, Lee, Lee, lawyer of the American Civil Liberties Union. He added that the use of the War Act by the administration “causes problems with extensive importance during the time of peace without proper procedure”.

The Trump administration has tried to use the law as an instrument in its signature initiative in order to accelerate the deportation of millions of migrants, which leads to a collision with a skeptical judiciary.

Several judges of the butchers have come to the conclusion that the administration exceeded the legal area of ​​the law, which can only be called if the United States were subjected to an “invasion” or “predatory ideas” and blocked the deportation of groups of Venezolans.

The judges of the Supreme Court have been complied with the deportation plans of the Trump administration in the Trump administration in the past few months, and they had already entered to temporarily block the deportation of a group of Venezolans in North Texas.

The arrangement on Friday came in one of these challenges after a legal fight between the Trump government and the lawyers of the ACLU. On April 18, the lawyers hurried to the court, after being known that Venezuelan migrants were captured and accused in Texas, to be members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, had received known announcements and were invited to buses, probably to the airport.

On behalf of two of the Venezuelans who were kept in the internment camp, the group quickly submitted a lawsuit in front of a federal court in Abilene, Texas. The lawyers of the Ministry of Justice answered and told a judge of the court that they had no direct plans to deport the prisoners.

The judge James W. Hendrix, who was appointed during the first Trump administration, refused to issue an arrangement that temporarily blocked the deportations.

The ACLU later asked the Supreme Court to act instead.

After midnight on April 19, the judges temporarily stood up for the deportations and wrote: “The government is instructed not to remove a member of the alleged class of prisoners until the further arrangement of this court,” says the order.

The judges moved quickly that night, and since then the emergency request was pending before the court.

The Attorney General D. John Sauer had asked the judges in a court report to enable the depth courts to weigh themselves before they continued to intervene in this case. He did not enter into the details of the ACLU claims that the deportations are imminent, with the buses being loaded for the airport. Rather, he said that the government had given the prisoners who were subject to an imminent deportation and they had “a reasonable time to make claims” that question their distance.

In an answer to the court, the ACLU denied this and argued that the Trump government had “taken measures that correspond to the specific decision of this court” that the government started a termination and time to contest the deportations.

Instead of making a message to enable the prisoners to question their distance, the group's letter said: “The government only gave prisoners an English form that is not made available to any lawyer, which is nowhere to be mentioned, which does not mention the right to deny or remove the name or removal, and less explain how prisoners can do this.”

At the beginning of this week, Mr. Sauer nudged the judges again to allow the deportations. In a submission, the administration claimed that the group of 176 migrants, which had been protected overnight overnight overnight overnight overnight overnight, had “resulted in serious difficulties in the past month before removal of emergency.

The Trump administration claimed that on April 26, a group of 23 migrants had barricaded itself in a residential unit for several hours threatened to take hostages and damage immigration officers, and tried to flood the unit by blocking the toilets.

“The government has a strong interest in removing the gang members who represent a danger to immigration officers, employees and other prisoners” immediately.

There were only a few public insights into the conditions in the Texas facility. On April 28, Reuter's aerial photos of the men held there recorded. In the Dirt Yard of the internment management center, 31 men, of whom some red overalls wore with high risk, formed the letters SOS.