The administration of US President Donald Trump has for the first time used a special court that had not been activated even once in 30 years to deport foreigners. With the Trump administration's immigrant deportation policy facing setbacks from public opinion and the Supreme Court, attention is focused on whether this court will be used as a new deportation tool.
First Activation Since Its 1996 Creation: The 'Alien Terrorist Removal Court'
On the 19th, Axios reported that the US Justice Department recently filed its first removal petition with the "Alien Terrorist Removal Court."
The court was established in 1996 to prevent the exposure of national security-related classified information during the deliberation of foreigner deportations, but no actual case had ever been filed until now. This was because the Justice Department reviewed about 100 potential applications through 2000 but determined that all could be handled through ordinary immigration law procedures.
Unlike ordinary immigration trials, proceedings in this court are conducted through a two-stage process. In a closed hearing, a judge determines whether there is a basis for the grounds of deportation, and then in a public hearing, the Justice Department must prove that the person in question qualifies as an "alien terrorist" under the law. However, even in the public hearing, national secrets are not disclosed to the public. The government need only present a summary excluding classified information. In fact, in the first petition the Justice Department submitted, the identity of the deportation target, the charges, and the applicable legal provisions were all kept confidential. Unlike ordinary criminal trials, the usual federal rules of evidence do not apply to proceedings in this court, and evidence collected unlawfully under the law can also be used. Those subject to deportation under the law include not only foreigners who have carried out or are likely to carry out terrorism, but also those who have incited or supported terrorism.
Blocked by Public Opinion and Opposed by the Supreme Court: Deportation Policy Struggles
This is interpreted as an alternative that emerged as the Trump administration's anti-immigration policy faced setbacks. Last year, President Trump also invoked the "Alien Enemies Act," enacted in the 18th century, to deport immigrants identified as members of the Venezuelan crime organization Tren de Aragua. However, the federal Supreme Court ruled that people targeted under that law must also receive prior notice and have the opportunity to challenge their deportation.
On June 30, the US federal Supreme Court ruled that President Trump's executive order barring automatic citizenship for children born in the United States violated the Constitution. The majority opinion held that it infringed the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to those born on US territory. Restricting birthright citizenship has been cited as a signature pledge of President Trump's hardline immigration policy.
This ruling was handed down by the Supreme Court, composed of six conservatives and three liberals, when three conservative justices joined the three liberal justices. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett determined that the executive order was unconstitutional, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority opinion on the grounds that it violated current federal law.
President Trump signed the executive order on January 20 last year, his first day in office, formally launching his policy to block illegal immigration. After Democratic-led state governments filed lawsuits and successively lost in lower courts, in April he showed strong resolve by personally attending the Supreme Court's oral arguments, an unusual move for a sitting president, but ultimately failed to overturn the final decision.
