Appeals Court Sidesteps Key Question Over Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act
NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-08-13 16:49:00 — www.nytimes.com
Trump’s Use of Wartime Law to Deport Venezuelans Rejected by Courts
President Trump, in a move that drew national attention, sought to use the sweeping powers of the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport dozens of Venezuelan men accused of belonging to the Tren de Aragua street gang. Trump claimed that these individuals had “invaded the country through the process of illegal immigration” and asserted that they were not merely criminals but were working in coordination with the hostile government of Venezuela, then led by Nicolás Maduro.
False Claims of “Invasion” Rejected by Courts
Trump’s position equated mass immigration with a military invasion, arguing that the presence of these Venezuelans constituted an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” justifying the use of wartime powers. However, several lower courts, including a conservative three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected these claims. The panel found that the American homeland was not under invasion by the gang and rebuffed the idea that immigration—even at a large scale—was synonymous with a military breach of U.S. borders.
Judge Leslie H. Southwick, writing for the majority, stated, “A country’s encouraging its residents and citizens to enter this country illegally is not the modern-day equivalent of sending an armed, organized force to occupy, to disrupt or to otherwise harm the United States. There is no finding that this mass immigration was an armed, organized force or forces.”
Legal Battle Ends on Technicality, Not on the Merits
Despite expectations that the full Fifth Circuit would overturn the panel and grant Trump the authority to use the Alien Enemies Act, the court instead dismissed the case on a legal technicality. The three Venezuelan men who filed the original lawsuit had already been expelled by the government through traditional immigration methods, leaving no plaintiffs and, therefore, no case.
The court’s decision leaves unresolved the broader legal questions about the use of wartime authority during peacetime. The injunction issued by the three-judge panel remains in effect, protecting immigrants in Texas from deportation under the Alien Enemies Act.
Conclusion
Trump’s attempt to frame mass immigration as a military invasion was firmly rejected by the courts, which found no evidence to support his claims. The legal battle over the use of the Alien Enemies Act ended not with a Supreme Court showdown, but with a dismissal on procedural grounds. The courts’ rulings underscore the lack of factual basis for Trump’s assertions and highlight the ongoing debate over the limits of presidential power in immigration enforcement.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/us/politics/alien-enemies-act-trump-appeals-court.html