Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump announces 10% global baseline tariff under Section 122 of Trade Act — Following the Supreme Court's ruling striking down his IEEPA-based tariffs, President Trump announced a new 10% global baseline tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits tariffs for 150 days. Trump stated the administration would initiate investigations into unfair trading practices that could lead to permanent tariffs. Trump framed the court's decision as actually strengthening presidential tariff authority and vowed to enact "very powerful alternatives" to the struck-down tariffs.
• Trump announces 10% global tariff under Section 122 — Following the Supreme Court's invalidation of his national emergency tariffs, Trump announced a 10% blanket global tariff "over and above our normal tariffs already being charged" under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which permits temporary tariffs to address balance-of-payments deficits. This action circumvents the Court's ruling by invoking alternative statutory authority, though Section 122 requires congressional approval to extend beyond 150 days and prohibits country-specific discrimination.
• Trump announces new 10% global tariff under Trade Act of 1974 — Hours after the Supreme Court ruling, President Trump held a press conference announcing he would continue his tariff war using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 instead of the IEEPA. He announced a new 10% global tariff and directed his administration to conduct investigations into unfair trading practices under other sections of the 1974 Act. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated the new tariffs would result in "virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026" and acknowledged the process would be more complicated but ultimately achieve the same outcome.
• Trump announces new 10% global tariff, increases to 15% within 24 hours — After the Supreme Court ruled his tariffs unconstitutional, President Trump announced a new 10% global tariff using different statutory authority and increased it to 15% less than 24 hours later. Trump stated "The policy hasn't changed. The legal tools that implement that may change but the policy hasn't changed," signaling intent to circumvent the court's constitutional ruling through alternative legal mechanisms. Top trade negotiator Jamieson Greer defended the shift as providing US business "leverage" in world trade.
• Trump signals intent to reimpose tariffs via alternative legal authority — At a news conference on 21 February 2026, President Trump stated he would attempt to reintroduce 10 percent tariffs on all countries using a different legal mechanism after the Supreme Court struck down his IEEPA-based tariffs. Trump characterized the court's failure to address refunds as "crazy" and predicted years of litigation. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent similarly suggested refunds could be delayed indefinitely.
• Trump announced 10% tariff on foreign imports following Supreme Court ruling — On Friday, February 21, 2026, immediately after the Supreme Court's decision striking down his IEEPA tariffs, Trump announced he was imposing a 10% tariff on foreign imports, directly contradicting the court's constitutional finding.
• Supreme Court ruled Trump's tariff regime unlawful; Trump announced new tariffs under Section 122 of Trade Act — The Supreme Court struck down Trump's sweeping tariff regime as lacking statutory authority. Within hours, Trump announced a new 10 percent worldwide tariff, raising it to 15 percent by the following morning, claiming authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Legal analysis indicates Section 122 permits only temporary import surcharges of up to 15 percent for no more than 150 days, and only when the United States faces a serious international balance-of-payments crisis. The current U.S. balance-of-payments deficit is zero, and no such crisis exists. Trump's new tariff announcement appears to be an attempt to circumvent the Court's ruling through a different legal theory.
• Supreme Court rules Trump tariffs illegal under emergency powers law — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on Friday declaring that most of Trump's tariffs lacked legal justification under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court held that tariff authority belongs to Congress during peacetime, not the president. Trump responded by announcing a 15% global tariff under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. Trade chief Jamieson Greer stated the administration would persist with tariff policy despite the ruling and would not seek congressional authorization for the new tariffs.
• Trump signs global 10% tariff proclamation under Section 122 after Supreme Court blocks tariff authority — President Trump signed a proclamation on February 21, 2026, imposing a temporary 10% tariff on all countries effective February 24, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The action followed a Supreme Court ruling blocking his use of tariffs. Trump claimed authority under existing statutes without congressional approval. Canada, Mexico, certain food products, and critical minerals were exempted. Trump publicly attacked six justices as a "disgrace to the nation" while praising three dissenters.
• Trump increased proposed global tariff rate from 10% to 15% via social media post — Trump announced via Truth Social that he was raising worldwide tariffs from the initially announced 10% to 15%, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The announcement claimed the tariffs would take effect "effective immediately," though it remained unclear whether official documents had been signed. This followed Trump's earlier press conference announcement of 10% tariffs and came after the Supreme Court struck down his previous tariff actions as illegal on Friday.
• Trump imposed 10% global tariff under Section 122 of Trade Act of 1974, then raised it to 15% — On February 21, 2026, President Trump announced a 10% global tariff citing Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, then raised it to 15% the following day. Trump invoked this authority immediately after the Supreme Court struck down his previous tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. According to Popular Information's analysis, Trump's invocation of Section 122 is legally defective because the statute authorizes tariffs only in response to "large and serious" balance-of-payments deficits, not trade deficits; the U.S. currently has a zero balance-of-payments deficit, making the tariff legally unsupported.
• Trump announces 15% global tariff under alternative legal framework — Following the Supreme Court's ruling, Trump announced a 15% global tariff on all foreign imports (increased from 10% announced Friday) under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, a different legal framework than the one struck down by the court. Trade chief Greer indicated the administration would not automatically seek congressional authorization for these tariffs, which are set to expire within five months without it.
• Trump escalated tariffs to 15% and claimed court ruling expanded his powers — On Saturday, February 22, 2026, Trump posted that he was raising tariffs from 10% to 15% worldwide, effective immediately. He claimed the Supreme Court's decision "accidentally and unwittingly" gave him "far more powers and strength" than before and that he could "do absolutely 'terrible' things to foreign countries" using tariffs the court had approved.
• Trump administration announced plans to scale back tariffs on steel and aluminum — The Trump administration announced it would review and scale back tariffs on steel and aluminum goods—which had been set at up to 50 percent the previous summer—and exempt some items while halting expansion of the tariff lists. The administration also planned to launch more targeted national security probes into specific goods instead of maintaining broad tariffs. This move was undertaken in response to an affordability crisis damaging Trump's approval ratings.
• Trump invoked Section 122 authority to impose 10% tariff on all imports — Following the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling, Trump immediately invoked Section 122 of the Tariff Act—an older statutory authority requiring no investigation but limited to 15 percent for 150 days—to impose a 10 percent tariff on all imports from all countries. This action circumvented the Court's restriction on unilateral IEEPA tariffs by relying on a different legal basis Congress had previously authorized.
• Trump raised Section 122 tariff from 10% to 15% — One day after imposing a 10 percent tariff under Section 122, Trump raised the rate to 15 percent—the statutory maximum under that authority. This escalation occurred within the same legal framework but pushed the temporary tariff to its ceiling.
• Trump imposed 15% tariff invoking Section 122 of Trade Act of 1974 — President Trump announced a 15% tariff by invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, days after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his prior tariff regime as unconstitutional. The administration's trade representative Jamieson Greer defended the move on Sunday shows, claiming the legal tool might change but policy remains consistent. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declined to commit to refunding approximately $134 billion collected under the now-invalidated tariffs, stating only that the administration would follow the court's direction.
• Administration announces pipeline of tariff investigations to rebuild tariff wall — Treasury Secretary Bessent announced on Sunday that Section 122 tariffs could expire after five months as Section 301 investigations into unfair trade practices and additional Section 232 national security tariffs are lined up to replace them. The administration is using procedural investigations as a mechanism to rebuild the same tariff structure that the Supreme Court struck down, using different legal authorities.
• Trade chief states tariff policy unchanged despite court ruling — On Sunday, U.S. trade negotiator Jamieson Greer told ABC News that the Trump administration would maintain its tariff policy and continue in the same direction, stating "the policy hasn't changed. The legal tools that implement that may change but the policy hasn't changed." Greer also confirmed the U.S. would not back out of bilateral tariff deals with the UK, EU, Japan, Switzerland, and others, despite the court ruling declaring those tariffs illegal.
• Trump delivered longest State of the Union address on record during partial DHS shutdown — President Trump delivered what multiple news outlets reported as the longest State of the Union address in U.S. history on February 24, 2026, while the Department of Homeland Security remained partially shut down since February 14. The address occurred during an active government funding lapse affecting federal workers' paychecks and DHS operations including TSA PreCheck, Global Entry, border security, airport screening, and the Coast Guard. Federal News Network reported it was the first SOTU ever delivered during an active partial government shutdown.
• Trump vowed to continue imposing tariffs despite Supreme Court ruling — During the State of the Union address, President Trump responded to the Supreme Court's striking down of his tariff authority by calling the ruling "unfortunate" and vowing to pursue "alternative" legal authorities to continue imposing tariffs without congressional approval. He also repeated the claim that tariffs are paid by foreign countries, contrary to evidence showing costs are borne primarily by American importers and consumers.
• Trump claimed he does not need Congressional approval for tariffs — Fifteen minutes after his threat post, at 9:49 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted that "As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs. It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago!" He claimed tariffs were "reaffirmed by the ridiculous and poorly crafted supreme court decision."
• Trump claims he has unchecked power after Supreme Court ruling — Trump publicly stated that the Supreme Court's ruling has given him "far more powers and strength" than before, suggesting he could use tariffs in a more aggressive manner. His comments reflect a disregard for the Court's authority and the principles of checks and balances.
• Trump posted that Supreme Court ruling granted him unchecked tariff power — At 7:06 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted on social media that the Supreme Court had "accidentally and unwittingly" given him "far more powers and strength" than he had before. He claimed he could use tariffs "in a much more powerful and obnoxious way, with legal certainty" and attacked the court with contemptuous language, writing "supreme court (will be using lower case letters for a while based on a complete lack of respect!)."
• Trump threatened higher tariffs against countries "playing games" — At 9:34 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted a threat that any country wanting to "play games" with the Supreme Court decision, especially those that have "ripped off" the U.S., would face "much higher Tariff, and worse" than recently agreed tariffs. The post ended with "BUYER BEWARE!!!"
• Trump threatens higher tariffs on foreign countries — Following the Supreme Court's ruling, Trump threatened that any country that "plays games" with the decision would face significantly higher tariffs. He asserted that he does not need Congressional approval for tariffs, claiming that previous approvals were sufficient. This statement reflects his intention to bypass legislative oversight in tariff implementation.
• Trump announced but did not sign 15 percent global tariff order — Trump announced plans to raise global tariffs to 15 percent under the 1974 Trade Act after his IEEPA tariffs were struck down by the Supreme Court. However, he never actually signed the order, meaning the effective tariff rate remained at 10 percent. The announcement was made publicly or on social media but was not formalized through executive action.
• Trump proclaims 10% temporary import surcharge on most goods for 150 days to address balance-of-payments deficit — President Trump issued Proclamation 11012 on February 20, 2026, imposing a temporary 10 percent ad valorem import surcharge effective February 24, 2026, for 150 days under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The proclamation cites large U.S. balance-of-payments deficits ($1.2 trillion goods trade deficit in 2024, current account deficit of 4.0% of GDP, and negative net international-investment position of -90% of GDP) as justification. Broad exemptions apply to critical minerals, energy, agricultural products, pharmaceuticals, vehicles, aerospace goods, and articles from Canada, Mexico, and Central American trade partners. The surcharge is in addition to existing tariffs and will be administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
• Trump administration imposes 10% global tariff after Supreme Court strikes down "liberation day" tariffs — Following a Supreme Court decision that struck down Trump's sweeping "liberation day" tariffs imposed the previous year, the Trump administration announced a 10% global tariff on imported articles from every country for 150 days, effective Tuesday. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated the rate would rise to 15% or higher for some countries. The move represents a recalibration of tariff policy in response to the court's rejection of the earlier tariff regime.
• Trump sought Supreme Court rehearing on tariff decision — Trump posted on social media requesting that the Supreme Court reconsider its recent tariff decision, arguing that the ruling "could allow for Hundreds of Billions of Dollars to be returned to Countries and Companies that have been 'ripping off' the USA for many years." Trump asked "Is a Rehearing or Readjudication of this case possible???" Legal experts confirmed that no such rehearing mechanism exists under Supreme Court rules.

Supporting reports

• Trump declares national emergency, shields Venezuelan oil revenue from U.S. court attachment — President Trump signed Executive Order 14373 on January 9, 2026, declaring a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and National Emergencies Act to protect Venezuelan government oil-revenue deposits held in U.S. Treasury accounts from judicial attachment or garnishment. The order invokes foreign policy and national security rationales—border control, narcotics interdiction, and regional stability—and directs the Treasury Secretary to hold these funds in custodial status, immune from private creditor claims, pending State Department disposition.
• Trump issued executive order declaring national emergency to shield Venezuelan government oil revenue deposits from U.S. judicial attachment — President Trump signed an executive order on January 9, 2026, declaring a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and National Emergencies Act to protect Venezuelan government oil revenue deposits held in U.S. Treasury accounts from judicial attachment or garnishment. The order prohibits courts from issuing liens, judgments, or other judicial process against these "Foreign Government Deposit Funds" derived from Venezuelan natural resource sales. The order asserts these funds are sovereign Venezuelan property held in custodial capacity and invokes national security and foreign policy interests, citing efforts to combat illegal immigration, narcotics trafficking, and malign actors like Iran and Hezbollah.
• Trump signed executive order shielding Venezuelan government oil revenue from U.S. judicial attachment — President Trump signed Executive Order 14373 on January 9, 2026, declaring a national emergency and prohibiting judicial attachment, liens, garnishment, or other legal process against Venezuelan government oil revenue held in U.S. Treasury accounts. The order asserts that such attachments would harm U.S. national security and foreign policy, specifically efforts to stabilize Venezuela, reduce immigration and narcotics trafficking, and counter Iranian influence. The order directs the Treasury Secretary to hold the funds in custodial status and comply with State Department instructions on their disposition.
• White House issues fact sheet on executive order protecting Venezuelan oil revenue in U.S. Treasury accounts — The White House published a fact sheet on January 9, 2026, describing an executive order signed by President Trump declaring a national emergency to shield Venezuelan oil revenues held in U.S. Treasury accounts from judicial attachment or process. The order blocks garnishment, liens, judgments, and other legal claims against these Foreign Government Deposit Funds, affirming them as sovereign Venezuelan property held for diplomatic purposes. The fact sheet states the order advances U.S. foreign policy objectives, including countering narcotics trafficking and illegal immigration, and prevents seizure that could "empower malign actors like Iran and Hezbollah."

Supporting reports

• Trump stated he could invoke the Insurrection Act without judicial review — During the 60 Minutes interview, Trump stated that if he needed to send the Army or Marines into cities, he would do so "in a heartbeat" using the Insurrection Act, claiming "no judge can even challenge you on that. If I wanted to I could."
• Trump claims he can invoke Insurrection Act without judicial review — During a 60 Minutes interview, Trump said he would send the Army or Marines into US cities "in a heartbeat" and claimed no judge could challenge his invocation of the Insurrection Act if he did so.

Supporting reports

• Federal district judge Karin Immergut blocks Trump's deployment of Oregon National Guard to Portland and imposes second order prohibiting any National Guard deployment — Federal district judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued an initial injunction blocking Trump's effort to deploy Oregon National Guard troops to Portland, stating his contentions about Portland's atmosphere were "simply untethered to the facts." When Trump attempted to circumvent this order by deploying federalized California National Guard troops to Oregon instead, Immergut imposed a second order prohibiting the deployment of any National Guard troops to Portland. The lower court ruling was later lifted by the three-judge appellate panel on October 21.
• Judge Immergut rejects Trump's Portland emergency claims and blocks national guard deployment — Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued a temporary restraining order blocking Trump's plan to deploy national guard troops to Portland, rejecting the administration's characterization of the city as "war-ravaged" and finding the president's emergency determination "untethered to the facts." Immergut concluded the deployment violated constitutional limits on executive power and misrepresented conditions on the ground. A federal appeals court later reversed her ruling on October 20, permitting deployment.

Supporting reports

• Judge Perry blocks national guard deployment to Chicago; appeals court upholds — Judge April Perry in Chicago issued a temporary restraining order rejecting the Department of Homeland Security's characterization of Chicago as a "war zone" and blocking national guard deployment, finding DHS claims "simply unreliable" and lacking credibility. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Perry's ruling. The Trump administration subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court to pause the ruling and permit deployment.
• Chicago federal judge blocks national guard deployment pending case resolution — Federal District Judge April Perry on Wednesday blocked national guard deployment to the Chicago area until her court decides the case or the US Supreme Court intervenes. Perry had previously blocked the deployment for two weeks through a temporary restraining order. Federal government attorneys said they would agree to extend the order but would continue pressing for an emergency Supreme Court order to allow deployment.

Supporting reports

• White House authorizes deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard members — On Saturday afternoon, a White House spokesperson announced that Trump has "authorized" the deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard members. Governor Pritzker later stated he had been informed that members of the Texas National Guard would also be deployed to Illinois, further expanding federal military presence in the state without state consent.
• Trump issued presidential memorandum calling 300+ Illinois National Guard into federal service to protect federal personnel and property in Illinois — President Trump issued a presidential memorandum on October 4, 2025, directing the Secretary of War to call at least 300 members of the Illinois National Guard into federal service. The memorandum states that federal facilities in Illinois, particularly those supporting ICE and Federal Protective Services, have faced "coordinated assault by violent groups" seeking to obstruct federal law enforcement and impede deportations. Trump determined that regular U.S. forces are insufficient and that the situation warrants mobilization. The National Guard personnel are authorized to perform protective activities the Secretary of War deems necessary to ensure federal law execution, with a 60-day duration or at the Secretary's discretion.
• Trump authorized deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard troops to Chicago — Trump authorized the deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard troops to Chicago. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker called the move unnecessary and a "manufactured performance—not a serious effort to protect public safety," signaling state-level resistance to the federal deployment order.
• Trump administration deploys 300 California National Guard troops to Portland — On Sunday, October 5, blocked from deploying Oregon National Guard troops in Portland by Judge Immergut's ruling, the Trump administration deployed 300 California National Guard troops to Portland instead. California Governor Gavin Newsom announced the deployment, characterizing it as "a breathtaking abuse of the law and power" and stating the Trump administration is "unapologetically attacking the rule of law itself and putting into action their dangerous words—ignoring court orders and treating judges, even those appointed by the President himself, as political opponents."
• Trump administration deploys national guard troops to Portland despite judicial order — The Pentagon deployed 200 national guard members from California to Oregon on Sunday, and the Trump administration announced plans to send additional troops from Texas, directly after Judge Immergut's temporary restraining order. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek reported that 101 California national guard members arrived by plane on Saturday night with no formal federal communication and unverified locations. The administration proceeded without state authorization or coordination.
• Trump administration orders Texas national guard deployment to Illinois without state authorization — The Trump administration ordered 400 members of the Texas national guard to deploy to Illinois, Oregon, and other states without communicating with Illinois Governor JB Pritzker. Texas Governor Greg Abbott stated he "fully authorized" Trump to deploy the troops. Chicago could see Texas troops deployed by Tuesday or Wednesday as the administration moves to federalize the Illinois national guard.
• Trump authorizes national guard deployment to Chicago — President Trump authorized deployment of 300 Illinois national guard troops to Chicago, citing "violent riots and lawlessness." The deployment follows a border patrol shooting of a woman on Chicago's southwest side during an operation where agents reported being rammed by vehicles. Governor JB Pritzker opposed the move, calling it unnecessary and stating the Pentagon issued an ultimatum to deploy troops or face federal deployment. The action occurs amid an intensified immigration enforcement crackdown by ICE in the city.
• Trump Authorizes Deployment of Illinois National Guard — President Trump authorized the deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard members to assist in protecting federal facilities, following a demand for the state to call up its troops. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker criticized this action as an overreach of federal power.
• Trump administration announces deployment of California national guard to Portland — Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced that approximately 200 federalized members of the California national guard were being reassigned from Los Angeles to Portland, Oregon at the direction of President Trump to support ICE and other federal personnel and protect federal property. This deployment occurred despite prior court orders and without state authorization, following Trump's September 27 announcement of plans to deploy guard troops to Portland.
• Illinois Governor Pritzker called Trump's National Guard deployment an "invasion" — Illinois Governor JB Pritzker stated that Trump ordered 400 Texas National Guard members for deployment to Illinois and other locations without any federal officials contacting him directly to discuss or coordinate the action. Pritzker characterized the deployment as "Trump's Invasion," noting it began with federal agents and would include federalized National Guard members against the state's wishes, and called on Texas Governor Abbott to withdraw support and refuse to coordinate.
• Texas Governor Abbott authorized National Guard deployment — Texas Governor Greg Abbott responded to Illinois Governor Pritzker's criticism by stating he fully authorized the President to call up 400 members of the Texas National Guard to ensure safety for federal officials, and argued that either other states must fully enforce protection for federal employees or allow Texas Guard to do so. Abbott asserted the superiority of Texas National Guard training and expertise.
• Trump administration federalized Texas National Guard for deployment to Portland and Chicago — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced the federalization of 2,000 Texas National Guard members, with 400 being deployed to Portland, Oregon and Chicago, Illinois. This action came immediately after a federal judge blocked the federalization of the Oregon National Guard, appearing to circumvent the court order by using troops from another state. The administration characterized this as a response to unrest in those cities.
• National Guard deployment to Chicago area begins — National Guard troops from Texas began arriving at Elwood Army Reserve Center, approximately 50 miles outside Chicago, as part of a Trump administration deployment. By Wednesday, 200 Texas National Guard troops had arrived with another 300 Illinois National Guard troops preparing to deploy. The FAA issued flight restrictions over the center until December 6. Trump administration officials stated troops would protect federal immigration agents and facilities, not assume law enforcement duties, though the deployment proceeded despite objections from Illinois Governor Pritzker and Mayor Johnson.
• Trump administration deploys national guard troops to Chicago area for immigration enforcement — The Trump administration deployed approximately 500 national guard troops (200 from Texas, 300 from Illinois) to the Chicago area to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities and federal property. The deployment occurred without coordination with Illinois Governor JB Pritzker or Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson. A federal judge held a hearing on whether to declare the deployment illegal, with state and city attorneys arguing it violates the Constitution. Trump attacked both officials on social media, saying they "should be in jail."

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court allows deportations under Alien Enemies Act with venue restrictions — The US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on April 7 that President Trump may continue using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged gang members, but imposed limits: judicial challenges must occur in Texas (where detainees are held), not Washington DC; detainees must receive notice and reasonable time to seek habeas relief before removal. The ruling lifted a DC judge's temporary block on deportations, though two planes had already departed US airspace before the order was issued.
• US Supreme Court lifts block on deportations under 1798 Alien Enemies Act, requires due process — On Monday, April 7, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to lift a temporary injunction blocking the Trump administration's deportation of 238 Venezuelan men to El Salvador under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. While allowing the deportations to proceed, the Court unanimously affirmed that individuals facing removal have a constitutional right to habeas corpus and due process to challenge their deportation. The case was remanded to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Texas for further proceedings on the legality of invoking the wartime statute.
• Ruling vacated — J.G.G. v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00766 — The Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision, vacated the district court's TROs holding that the case should have been brought as a habeas case where the plaintiffs were in custody at the time. The Court also stated, “notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”
• Supreme Court Grants Emergency Application in Trump v. J.G.G. — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision granting the federal government's emergency application to vacate a lower court's order in the case of Trump v. J.G.G. The case involved a presidential proclamation under the Alien Enemies Act targeting members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. The lower court had temporarily blocked the deportation of several Venezuelan men, treating them as a class. The Supreme Court's decision vacated this order, requiring challenges to be filed individually through habeas petitions in Texas, where some plaintiffs were held, rather than as a class action in D.C. The opinion did not address the use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations but affirmed non-citizens' due process rights.
• Supreme Court allowed deportation of Venezuelan migrants under Alien Enemies Act — The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to deport Venezuelan migrants using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act in a 5-4 decision. The ruling stated that migrants must be told they are being deported under the act and receive "reasonable time" to challenge their removal in the state where they are detained.
• Supreme Court releases opinion in Trump v. J. G. G. (24A931) — The Supreme Court released an official slip opinion in Trump v. J. G. G. Docket number(s): 24A931.