Trump touts Supreme Court deportation ruling as a major victory, but legal fight is far from over

The Supreme Court's ruling lifted a restraining order from a judge in the nation's capital that had blocked the Trump administration from deporting people under the law.

But it doesn't allow those deportations to start right away. The court said that the accused have to be given notice and reasonable time to try and convince a judge that they shouldn't be deported.

The families of multiple people who have already been deported under the Alien Enemies Act say they are not gang members, and should not have been deported under the law.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Fox News that she expected future hearings to be held in Texas, and for judges to deal with each case individually rather than issue orders about the group as a whole.

“It will be a much smoother, simpler hearing,” she said.

Texas may not be the only venue, though. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a class-action lawsuit Tuesday on behalf of two immigrants who are currently held in New York and say they have been wrongly labeled as members of Tren de Aragua, or TdA, putting them at risk of deportation to the prison.

Many questions about Trump’s use of the act remain unresolved

The Supreme Court’s ruling did not address the constitutionality of the act or the migrants’ claim that they don’t fall within the category of people who can be deported under the law.

It’s also not clear how this ruling affects the more than 100 people who have already been sent to the El Salvador prison under the Alien Enemies Act without being given an opportunity to challenge their removals before the flights, which the court now says is necessary. The ruling didn't address what kind of recourse, if any, those migrants may be entitled to.

In another case involving a man mistakenly deported to the El Salvador prison, the administration has said it has no way to get him back. That man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, was not deported under the Alien Enemies Act, but the administration has conceded that he shouldn’t have been sent to El Salvador because an immigration judge found he likely would face persecution by local gangs.

Chief Justice John Roberts agreed Monday to pause a deadline for the Trump administration to bring Garcia back to the U.S.

Abrego Garcia's lawyer told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that the justices' finding that migrants must have a chance to challenge their removal underscores his client's argument that his rights were violated and that he must be returned to the U.S.

“Indeed because Abrego Garcia was deprived of any judicial review whatsoever, he had no opportunity to even respond to prove that he is not a member of MS-13,” his attorney told the high court in a letter.

Trump administration says it's working to identify alleged gang members

Todd Lyons, acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement director, said Tuesday that he couldn't estimate how many people would be deported under the act, which the administration wants to use to target foreign terrorists and transnational criminal organizations like Tren de Aragua or TdA.

“The thing about TdA is there’s no real, like, membership card, they’re not out there self-identifying. It’s really through partnerships with the rest of DHS and local law enforcement identifying those individuals,” Lyons told reporters during Border Security Expo, a trade show in Phoenix.

Asked about the lack of criminal history among some Venezuelans imprisoned in El Salvador and their inability to respond to evidence against them, Lyons said: “I’m confident that those individuals we took action on were the ones we needed to take action on.”

At the trade show, Deputy Customs and Border Protection Commissioner John Modlin received a round of applause as he talked about the videos shared on social media of the shackled migrants sent to the El Salvador prison.

“Man, hats off to the public affairs people in El Salvador. They came up with those videos. That was amazing. It sends a message across the globe,” Modlin said.

The case has become a flashpoint in Trump’s fight with the courts

Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling, the case had become one of the most contentious legal battles waged by the administration over Trump’s sweeping executive actions. Trump has called for the judge’s impeachment, prompting a rare statement from Roberts to say that such action is not the appropriate response to disagreements over court rulings.

Boasberg has been contemplating whether to hold any administration officials in contempt of court for ignoring his orders last month to turn around planes that were carrying the deportees to El Salvador.

Boasberg had been expected to rule as early as this week on whether there are grounds to find anyone in contempt. During a hearing last week, he said the Trump administration may have “acted in bad faith” by trying to rush the migrants out of the country before a court could step in to block the deportations.

It’s not clear whether Boasberg would move forward with contempt proceedings after the Supreme Court’s ruling vacating his order.

A Justice Department lawyer told the judge Monday evening that the Supreme Court’s decision “eliminates the basis” for any further action. The Justice Department has said the administration didn’t violate the judge’s order, arguing it didn’t apply to planes that had already left U.S. airspace by the time his command came down.

___

Associated Press journalists Cedar Attanasio in New York City and Elliot Spagat in Phoenix contributed to this story.