Trump Administration Believes 1700s Wartime Law Allows Federal Agents to Enter Homes Without Warrants: Report

The Trump Administration Considers Using Alien Enemies Act to Enter Homes Without Warrant: Report

The Trump administration’s latest move in immigration enforcement has raised concerns over potential violations of privacy and rights. President Donald Trump recently signed a proclamation invoking the rarely used Alien Enemies Act of 1798, allowing for the targeting and removal of noncitizens deemed as “alien enemies” without due process. A report by The New York Times reveals that Justice Department lawyers are interpreting this act as granting federal agents the authority to enter homes without warrants in search of suspected individuals.

Critics have been quick to question the legality and ethical implications of such actions, drawing parallels to past controversial uses of the law. The Alien Enemies Act was previously invoked during wartime, notably by President Franklin D. Roosevelt after the attack on Pearl Harbor to justify the internment of Japanese Americans. However, using this act during peacetime for immigration enforcement purposes is unprecedented and has raised significant constitutional concerns.

Legal experts have pointed out that the act was historically reserved for situations involving a declared war or foreign invasion, criteria that are not met in the current immigration crackdown. Christopher Slobogin, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, highlighted that invoking the Alien Enemies Act during peacetime undermines fundamental constitutional protections, such as the Fourth Amendment and due process rights.

President Trump’s administration’s initial focus under this proclamation has been on suspected members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang. The directive authorised the removal of Venezuelan citizens associated with the gang, leading to the detainment and subsequent deportation of over 100 individuals to El Salvador. However, legal challenges have been raised, with a federal judge halting further deportations and questioning the use of the Alien Enemies Act in this context.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has taken a strong stance against Trump’s use of the act, arguing that it is not intended for peacetime immigration enforcement and circumvents Congress’ authority to declare a state of war. Critics fear that such actions could set a dangerous precedent, allowing for broad executive powers over noncitizens’ rights and freedoms. The ACLU’s lead counsel, Lee Gelernt, has emphasised the need for judicial intervention to prevent the misuse of this wartime law for immigration purposes.

Beyond legal challenges, the broader implications of using the Alien Enemies Act in this manner have sparked outrage and comparisons to past abuses of power. Concerns have been raised about the potential for expanded executive authority, including restrictions on individuals’ movements, speech, and livelihoods. Critics argue that such actions erode constitutional protections and threaten the rights of all individuals, regardless of their citizenship status.

As the debate over the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act unfolds, it has become a focal point for discussions on immigration policy, civil liberties, and presidential authority. The clash between national security concerns and individual rights underscores the delicate balance between law enforcement needs and respecting fundamental freedoms. The outcome of these legal challenges and public debates will shape the future of immigration enforcement practices and constitutional safeguards in the United States.