Quote of the Day
Newly uncovered guidance from the Justice Department claims the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) allows federal law enforcement officers to enter the houses of suspected gang members without a warrant and remove them from the country without any judicial review.
C.J. Ciaramella
April 25, 2025
Pam Bondi says “alien enemies” can be deported without judicial review
A copy of the DOJ document and attachments referred to is here.
Among other things, the document says:
For purposes of this guidance memorandum, an “Alien Enemy” under the Proclamation and 50 U.S.C. § 21 is a person who is: (1) fourteen years of age or older; (2) not a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States; (3) a citizen of Venezuela; and ( 4) a member of the hostile enemy Tren de Aragua, as determined by reference to Form AEA-21A, titled, “Alien Enemies Act: Alien Enemy Validation Guide,” attached to this memorandum.
Determining if someone meets the requirements of item (4) above only requires a law enforcement officer and their supervisor’s signatures. It is claimed there is no access to judicial review of this determination. I see no mention of penalties for false findings.
This is asking for abuse. Imagine President Gavin Newsom getting a similar law regarding domestic terrorists passed through a democrat majority Congress and Senate. Then he declares members of the NRA as qualifying for a one-way trip to Gitmo.
But you might claim that would be different because the 2nd Amendment is a specific enumerated right. The right of association is also an enumerated right. If the organization is involved in criminal activities, does that mean all members are automatically criminals? Suppose the NRA is found to have been engaged in criminal activity. Are all NRA members then criminals as well?
If item (4) is not satisfied, they can still be legally deported. This is because they are not a citizen or legal permanent resident. But in this case judicial review is required. So how is the judicial review eliminated by getting the signatures of two law enforcement people?
I am not a lawyer, but this seems to be, constitutionally, highly suspect.