&w=3840&q=100)
Showdown in court: Trump's bid to use 18th-century law for mass deportations faces crucial test
A federal appeals court is set to hear arguments today on whether President Donald Trump can invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to justify mass deportations, a case likely headed to the Supreme Court.
One of President Trump's most controversial claims of executive power came in March, when he issued a proclamation invoking an 18th-century law to justify rounding up and deporting dozens of immigrants he alleged were members of a Venezuelan street gang.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
According to a report by The New York Times, the Alien Enemies Act has been used only three times in US history, and only during wartime.
Trump's use of the law has sparked serious questions about whether his actions align with the statute's actual text, added the report.
For over three months, courts nationwide have struggled to answer whether President Trump overstepped legal boundaries in pursuing one of his key policy goals: mass deportation of immigrants.
On Monday, the legal fight reaches a critical stage as the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans hears arguments over Trump's use of t he Alien Enemies Act.
The case is expected to revisit legal points already raised in lower courts by both the Trump administration and attorneys representing the Venezuelan men targeted under the policy.
However, this hearing could prove decisive, likely becoming the first case on the issue to reach the Supreme Court for a full review of whether Trump's use of the centuries-old law was lawful.
About Alien Enemies Act
Enacted in 1798 when United States faced potential war with France, the Alien Enemies Act grants the president broad authority to detain and expel nationals from hostile foreign powers, but only during a declared war, invasion, or what the law calls a 'predatory incursion.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
From the outset, the Trump administration has taken an unorthodox approach to the statute, using it to target dozens of Venezuelan men accused of ties to the Tren de Aragua street gang, which President Trump has labeled a foreign terrorist organisation.
Trump and his advisers have argued that the men are not simply gang members, but operatives acting in coordination with the Venezuelan government. Their presence in the US, they claim, amounts to an invasion by a hostile state.
According to the NYT report_,_ the American Civil Liberties Union, representing the Venezuelan men, has dismissed the administration's claims as baseless. ACLU lawyers argue that mass migration is not an invasion and say there's no clear evidence linking their clients, many with no criminal records, to the Venezuelan government.
Most federal courts so far have agreed, ruling that Trump misused the Alien Enemies Act and that the migrants do not pose a military threat. However, two courts have backed the administration, citing the president's broad authority over foreign affairs, especially involving a group labeled a terrorist organisation, added the report.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The ACLU faces tough odds in the Fifth Circuit, one of the most conservative appeals courts in the country. Regardless of Monday's outcome, the case is widely expected to head to the Supreme Court.
Unusual path to Fifth Circuit
The case reached the Fifth Circuit through an unusual route. In April, the ACLU filed an emergency lawsuit after learning the Trump administration planned to deport Venezuelans held at the Bluebonnet Detention Facility in Texas under the Alien Enemies Act.
The ACLU argued it was a tactic to sidestep court orders in other states blocking similar deportations. When a district judge didn't act quickly, the ACLU appealed to the Fifth Circuit and then the Supreme Court, warning the men faced imminent removal to El Salvador.
The Supreme Court temporarily halted the deportations, citing due process violations but avoiding the broader legal question. Last month, it upheld the freeze and sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit, instructing it to rule on two key issues: whether Trump's use of the Act was lawful and what notice immigrants must receive before removal.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
With inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
31 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Dalai Lama insists process to find his successor must follow traditional Tibetan Buddhist practices; China differs
Ahead of his 90th birthday this month, the 14th Dalai Lama, the highest spiritual leader of Tibet and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has reiterated that the process to find his successor must follow traditional Tibetan Buddhist practices. Traditionally, a child believed to be the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama is identified and educated to prepare him for the role. However, there is a concern among several Tibetan Buddhist monks over the potential interference of China in the selection of 15th Dalai Lama. As if to confirm the concern of the Tibetan monks, the Chinese state media and officials have asserted that Beijing will determine the next Dalai Lama. "The reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama (second only to Dalai Lama) and other great Buddhist figures must be chosen by drawing lots from a golden urn, and approved by the central government," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning told news agency AFP. Meanwhile, according to The New York Times, in a recorded statement to a meeting of senior Tibetan Buddhist monks in Dharamsala on Wednesday, the Dalai Lama offered few specifics, but made a suggestion that was seen as blocking any Chinese influence from the process of identifying the future reincarnation of the Tibetan spiritual leader. He said that the Dalai Lama's office has 'sole authority' to recognize such a reincarnation. 'No one else has any such authority to interfere in this matter,' he said. The selection of the next Dalai Lama is considered one of the significant problems in the contemporary China-Tibet issue. According to a paper by Kota Kanemaki (Part-time lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Keio University) titled The 'Ageing' Dalai Lama and China: Focus on the Selection of New Dalai Lama, the author recalls that in 2011, after China's intervention in the selection of the 11th Panchen Lama, who is second to Dalai Lama, the 14th Dalai Lama stated 'When I reach around 90 years old... I would like to reconsider whether it is necessary to continue the system of recognizing the Dalai Lama as reincarnation.' In 1999, the 14th Dalai Lama, anticipating Chinese intervention, stated: 'If my reincarnation is to be selected through traditional methods, there will be no reincarnation of mine in Tibet or areas under Chinese rule', thereby checking China.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
36 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US to levy 1% remittance tax: What it means for NRIs and students
The US Senate on Tuesday passed President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act', bringing with it a new tax on overseas money transfers by non-citizens. The legislation, which takes effect on July 4, 2025, introduces a 1 per cent levy on remittances made through cash, money orders, or cashier's cheques. The rule will apply to anyone who isn't a US citizen—including Green Card holders, people on temporary visas such as H-1B or H-2A and foreign students. 'For example, if you send $1,160—or around ₹100,000—to your parents in India, you may have to pay ₹1,000 more in tax,' said Rajarshi Dasgupta, executive director – tax. 'That money will be collected by the remittance provider—be it Western Union, MoneyGram or a bank—and passed on to the US government every quarter,' he told Business Standard. In a relief for Indians, the tax rate was originally set at 5 per cent, but was reduced to 1 per cent in the final version of the Bill. Why it matters to India? Remittances play a key role in India's foreign income. According to the World Bank, India received $129 Billion in international remittances in 2024—the highest in the world. Mexico was second with just over $68 Billion. Nearly 28 per cent of India's remittance inflows in 2023-24 came from the United States alone. Several Indian states, including Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar, rely heavily on these funds for household income. But there's been a recent shift in the pattern, particularly when it comes to money sent by students abroad. Remittances from students on the decline Funds sent by resident Indians under the Reserve Bank of India's Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS) fell 6.84 per cent to $29.56 Billion in 2024-25, down from $31.74 Billion the previous year. The steepest drop was seen in money remitted for education abroad. According to the RBI, these remittances fell 16 per cent—from $3.48 Billion to $2.92 Billion. 'Tighter work authorisation policies and recent visa rule changes in the United States have significantly disrupted traditional patterns of student mobility, with a direct impact on remittance flows,' Prof Venkataramanan, pro vice-chancellor at FLAME University told Business Standard. He added, 'Canada's move to cap study permits and require provincial attestation letters, alongside stricter financial documentation, has raised the entry threshold for students. The United States has paused visa interviews and announced aggressive visa revocations targeting certain nationalities. These factors are making families rethink the scale of investment in foreign education.' Families are more cautious about education loans and remittances Prashant A Bhonsle, founder and CEO of Kuhoo Finance, said the uncertainty around post-study work options is a growing concern for parents. 'Students and parents are questioning the return on investment when career security abroad becomes uncertain,' he told Business Standard. Visa processing delays are adding another layer of difficulty. 'For students still in India, delayed visa approvals mean postponed tuition and living expense payments. For those already abroad, uncertainty about their future makes them hesitant to send money back home,' Bhonsle explained. According to Pavan Kavad, managing director at Prithvi Exchange, recent visa policy changes in the UK and Australia are also linked to the remittance dip. 'Developed economies are facing employment challenges amid recession fears. Families are waiting for more clarity before transferring large sums abroad,' he said. Indian institutions and banks adjust to the shift Venkataramanan pointed out that some Indian banks and financial institutions are already adapting. 'Public and private banks are seeing more staggered disbursals of education loans instead of upfront payments. Families are aligning payments with semester confirmations, often waiting for visa approvals before committing,' he said. NBFCs and fintech firms, he added, are also reporting a drop in high-value remittances. Meanwhile, Bhonsle noted that tighter financial documentation rules abroad have made it harder for families to demonstrate the funds required for visa approvals. 'This has created larger upfront commitments that not all families can meet easily,' he said. Trust in the visa system is faltering Beyond the rules themselves, trust appears to be the larger issue. 'In the US, social media scrutiny, visa delays, and the new remittance tax all contribute to the sense that studying abroad is more financially risky,' Kavad said. That perception is prompting Indian families to either delay their plans or look at domestic alternatives. 'The slowdown has led financial institutions to take a more cautious and adaptive approach,' said Venkataramanan. 'We may be in a transitional phase rather than a terminal decline. If visa clarity improves and financial processes become more predictable, the flows could recover. Until then, families will continue to explore more stable options.'
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
How is the India-US trade deal shaping up?
Though US President Donald Trump has expressed optimism that a bilateral trade deal (BTA) with India can be concluded soon, the two sides are said to be apart on key issues including dairy and agriculture. This comes as Trump's July 9 deadline, following which reciprocal tariffs will be reimposed, draws nearer and nearer. But what did Trump say? How is the India-US trade deal shaping up? read more President Donald Trump shakes hands with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the Oval Office of the White House. AP US President Donald Trump has expressed optimism about a possible bilateral trade deal (BTA) with India. Though there are reports that the trade deal might be finalised this week, the two sides are said to be apart on key issues including agriculture. Trump, who had initially imposed reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries including a 26 per cent levy on India on April 2, had issued a 90day-pause in order to allow countries to negotiate. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But with the July 9 deadline is drawing nearer and nearer, India and the US have still not reached a deal. But what did Trump say? How is the India-US trade deal shipping up? Let's take a closer look: What Trump said First let's take a brief look at what Trump said. Trump said he thinks the United States and India would reach a bilateral trade agreement. 'I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I think India is going to do that, and if they do that, we are going to have a deal for much less tariffs,' Trump said. President Donald Trump said a deal could be imminent. AP Trump's remarks came after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Tuesday said that India and the US were 'very close' on a deal. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Monday had expressed optimism about a deal being concluded. 'We are in the middle — hopefully more than the middle — of a very intricate trade negotiation,' Jaishankar said. 'Obviously, my hope would be that we bring it to a successful conclusion. I cannot guarantee it, because there's another party to that discussion.' Trump in June said the deal with India was imminent. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We have one coming up, maybe with India. A very big one. Where we're going to open up India,' Trump said. 'We're not going to make deals with everybody. Some, we are just going to send them a letter, say thank you very much… My people don't want to do it that way. They want to do some of it, but they want to make more deals than I would do', he added. Now, let's take a look at what we know about the negotiations. How are negotiations going? The Indian delegation led by chief negotiator Rajesh Aggarwal had landed in the United States on Friday. The team, which is negotiating with US officials including those from the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), has now extended its stay in Washington. Both teams, mindful of the upcoming deadline set by Trump, were said to be in fierce negotiations over the BTA. However, key sticking points remain. New Delhi is said to be adamant about carving out protections for its dairy and agriculture industry. This is out of consideration for the millions of farmers working on small landholdings across the country. This can also be both a politically and economically sensitive issue to navigate. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India is said to be adamant about protecting its farmers. PTI India, for those not in the know, has never opened up its dairy sector to a foreign competitor. India is the biggest producer of milk in the world. Experts also say any reduction in tariffs on dairy and agriculture could undermine India's Minimum Support Price (MSP) system – which could be devastating to farmers. However, the US negotiators seem insistent about opening up a new market for its agricultural products including genetically modified crops, apples, reducing tariffs on skimmed milk powder and poultry products. India has been reluctant to allow genetically modified crops to be sold out of health concerns. India has banned the commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops. Washington, which is looking to bring down its $54 billion trade deficit with New Delhi, wants to export maize, soya bean, cotton and corn to India. India has told negotiators reducing tariffs on skimmed milk powder and poultry would hurt its small farmers. Indian officials have described the dairy sector as a 'red line' that cannot be crossed. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD They earlier insisted that India's national interest will come first in any deal. The US also wants large-scale commitments from India to buy Boeing aircraft, choppers and nuclear reactors. Washington may also pursue trying to get India to relax its FDI rules – which would benefit US behemoths such as Amazon and Walmart. Officials say that India can likely bring down tariffs for ethanol, almonds, apples, raisins, avocados, olive oil, spirits and wines. New Delhi, on the other hand, wants the United States to reduce levies on auto imports and Indian steel. India also wants preferential access for its labour-intensive exports, such as textiles and garments, gems and jewellery, leather goods, and agricultural products like shrimp, oilseeds, grapes, and bananas. The US wants India to open up its agriculture, dairy, aviation and energy sectors, while New Delhi is looking for Washington to cut tariffs on steel and auto parts Officials say that these will not likely hurt those selling these products domestically in the US. Though the government think tank Niti Aayog had in a working paper in May suggested that India can relax tariffs on 'soybean oil imports', that paper has now been taken offline – which raises many questions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India remains the world's biggest importer of edible oil. Officials say that reducing tariffs on maize and soybeans would hurt Indian small farmers. Similarly, bringing down tariffs on maize would result in the production becoming unfeasible for local farmers. If talks don't pan out, India will likely face a 10 per cent across the board levy rather than the 26 per cent tariff Trump imposed. But experts say a 'limited trade pact', like the one the US and UK announced on May 8, is likely. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump in February had agreed to increase bilateral trade, which was at $262 billion in 2024, to $500 billion by 2030. With inputs from agencies
