美国司法部律师表示，特朗普政府不会遵守法院要求为去年被驱逐至萨尔瓦多一座最高安全级监狱的数百名委内瑞拉移民提供正当程序的命令。这一决定将在下周的法庭上引发激烈冲突，而这起案件几乎肯定会再次提交至最高法院。
去年3月，根据1798年《外国敌人法案》，252名委内瑞拉移民被驱逐至萨尔瓦多监狱。他们的现状和困境已成为特朗普第二任期内最具标志性的法庭斗争之一，使政府能够在特朗普最大的政策优先事项之一上，考验其在联邦法院面前的决心以及司法权威的实际限制。
负责审理《外国敌人法案》案件的美国联邦地区法官詹姆斯·博斯伯格（James Boasberg）正处在特朗普政府的枪口下。他试图确定政府在法律上有义务为移民提供何种正当程序保护（如果有的话），以及法院在执行这些保护措施时能走多远。
司法部的新文件明确表示，政府认为不会为这些移民提供任何额外的正当程序。如果法院试图下令要求政府提供，政府律师称将立即寻求上级法院的干预。
最高法院冻结将男子从萨尔瓦多监狱遣返的命令
司法部在周一提交的文件中再次辩称，政府无力遣返去年被即决驱逐的委内瑞拉移民。该部门驳斥了美国可以“协助”移民进行正当程序诉讼的说法（此前法院曾下达过相关命令），称由于国家安全考虑以及美国上月在加拉加斯突袭抓获委内瑞拉强人尼古拉斯·马杜罗后该国脆弱的政治局势，这样做在法律上不可行或实际上无法执行。
司法部还重申其论点：将申诉人带回美国会损害与委内瑞拉的“关键”外交政策谈判，并带来“深远”的国家安全风险，理由是这些移民被指称有帮派成员身份（许多人的帮派成员身份已受到质疑）。
司法部律师还驳斥了在海外（包括美国驻委内瑞拉大使馆）进行诉讼的想法，理由是美国逮捕了马杜罗及其妻子。
他们表示，美国在外国领土上缺乏进行人身保护诉讼的管辖权，这样做可能会“将极其复杂的问题注入委内瑞拉本已微妙的局势”，可能“对旨在惠及数千万委内瑞拉人的稳定与过渡努力产生负面影响”。
尽管法官博斯伯格发出了紧急法院命令，这些驱逐行动仍在继续，这引发了长达11个月的法律斗争，该案件于今年4月提交至最高法院，并在下级法院展开了数月的辩论，其中包括博斯伯格在12月下达的另一项命令，要求政府“协助”被驱逐至萨尔瓦多的移民获得正当程序。
强硬的马杜罗首次在美国法院露面，称自己是“战俘”
当时最高法院表示，根据《外国敌人法案》被驱逐的个人在被驱逐前必须能够对其驱逐提出异议，并获得有意义的机会和通知。
自那以后的几个月里，博斯伯格一直在试图确定数百名CECOT诉讼原告的地位，以及美国有多大能力协助他们返回美国或为这些移民群体提供正当程序和人身保护令保护（包括质疑其被指称的帮派成员身份的能力）。
他在12月的命令中要求特朗普政府以书面形式向法院提交为被驱逐至萨尔瓦多的移民群体提供正当程序的计划。博斯伯格表示，政府可以通过以下方式实现这一点：要么将移民带回美国亲自审理案件，要么在国外与该群体成员举行听证会，且听证会“满足正当程序要求”。
上诉法院在《外国敌人法案》移民诉讼中阻止特朗普政府的驱逐航班
上个月，司法部律师在由17名法官组成的美国第五巡回上诉法院“全席”小组面前提出了类似的论点。该小组召开会议，审议特朗普政府使用这部已有227年历史的法律的合法性。
司法部当时告诉法官，美国对马杜罗的起诉书“强化了《公告》中的调查结果，即马杜罗政权和Tierra de los Andes（注：原文此处可能为“Tda”或其他名称，原文为“TdA”）已形成一个由政权领导的‘混合犯罪国家’”，并为使用《外国敌人法案》迅速将其驱逐至第三国监狱的决定提供了正当理由。
“这些新发展突显了马杜罗政权对TdA的控制，以及TdA对美国领土的‘暴力入侵或掠夺性侵犯’。因此，更清楚的是，总统援引《外国敌人法案》是一项高层国家安全任务的一部分，不受司法干预。”
美国公民自由联盟（ACLU）律师李·格勒恩特（Lee Gelernt）在同一场听证会上告诉法官，《外国敌人法案》并未赋予政府“总统可以随时出于自身利益动用其战争权力的空白支票”。
点击此处获取福克斯新闻应用程序
无论博斯伯格如何裁决，新文件明确表明特朗普政府认为这场斗争远未结束。
“如果法院不顾被告强烈的法律和实际反对意见发布禁令，被告打算立即上诉，并将寻求本法院（必要时寻求华盛顿特区巡回法院）在上诉期间暂缓执行。”司法部表示。
布雷恩·德皮施（Breanne Deppisch）是福克斯新闻数字版的国家政治记者，报道特朗普政府，重点关注司法部、联邦调查局和其他国家新闻。她此前曾在《华盛顿 examiner》和《华盛顿邮报》报道国家政治，还为《政治杂志》、《科罗拉多公报》等媒体撰稿。您可以向布雷恩发送提示至Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com，或在X平台关注她@breanne_dep。
The Trump administration will not comply with a court order requiring due process for hundreds of Venezuelan migrants deported to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador last year, DOJ lawyers said. It sets up a heated clash in court next week in a case that is almost certainly headed back to the Supreme Court.
The status and plight of 252 Venezuelan migrants deported to a Salvadoran prison last March under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act have emerged as one of the defining court fights of Trump’s second term, allowing the administration to test its mettle against the federal courts and the practical limits of judicial authority, on one of Trump’s biggest policy priorities.
It’s a fight that has also put U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing the Alien Enemies Act case, squarely in the Trump administration’s crosshairs as he attempts to determine what due process protections, if any, the administration is legally obligated to provide and how far the courts can go to enforce them.
A new filing from the Justice Department made clear the administration believes it owes the migrants no additional due process at all. Should the court try to order otherwise, lawyers for the administration said they would promptly seek intervention from higher courts.
SUPREME COURT FREEZES ORDER TO RETURN MAN FROM EL SALVADOR PRISON
In its filing Monday, the Justice Department argued again that the administration is powerless to return the Venezuelan migrants who were summarily deported last year. The department rejected the notion that the U.S. could “facilitate” due process proceedings for the migrants in question as previously ordered by the court, describing the options to do so as either legally impossible or practically unworkable due to national security concerns and the fragile political situation in Venezuela after the U.S. capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro during a raid in Caracas last month.
The DOJ also reiterated its argument that bringing petitioners back to the U.S. would harm “critical” foreign policy negotiations with Venezuela and carry “profound” national security risks, citing the alleged gang member status of the migrants in question. (The alleged gang member status of many of the individuals has been called into question.)
DOJ lawyers also rejected the notion of conducting the proceedings overseas, including at the U.S. embassy in Venezuela, citing the U.S. capture and arrest of Maduro and his wife.
The U.S., they said, lacks custody to conduct the habeas proceedings on foreign soil and doing so would risk “injecting an extremely complicated issue into what is already a delicate situation” in Venezuela, potentially “negatively affecting U.S. efforts toward stabilization and transition that aim to benefit tens of millions of Venezuelans.”
The deportations, carried out under the Alien Enemies Act despite an emergency court order from Judge Boasberg, prompted an eleven-month legal battle that reached the Supreme Court in April and months of fights in the lower courts, including a subsequent order from Boasberg in December for the government to “facilitate” due process for the deported migrants.
DEFIANT MADURO DECLARES HE IS A ‘PRISONER OF WAR’ IN FIRST US COURT APPEARANCE
The Supreme Court said then that individuals removed under the Alien Enemies Act must have the ability to contest their removal and have a meaningful opportunity and notice to do so before they are removed.
Boasberg has spent the months since attempting to determine the status of the hundreds of CECOT plaintiffs and what ability the U.S. has to facilitate their return or to provide the class of migrants with due process and habeas protections, including the ability to challenge their alleged gang status.
His December order required the Trump administration to submit to the court in writing its plans to provide due process to the class of migrants deported to El Salvador. Boasberg said the administration could do this by either returning the migrants to the U.S. to have their cases heard in person or facilitate hearings abroad with members of the class that “satisfy the requirements of due process.”
APPEALS COURT BLOCKS TRUMP ADMIN’S DEPORTATION FLIGHTS IN ALIEN ENEMIES ACT IMMIGRATION SUIT
Lawyers for the Justice Department previewed similar arguments last month before an “en banc” 17-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which convened to weigh the legality of the Trump administration’s use of the 227-year-old law.
The Justice Department told judges then that the U.S. indictment against Maduro “reinforces the Proclamation’s findings that the Maduro regime and TdA have formed a ‘hybrid criminal state’ directed by the regime” and justified the decision to use the Alien Enemies Act law to quickly deport them to the third-country prison.
“These new developments underscore the Maduro Regime’s control over TdA and TdA’s violent invasion or predatory incursion on American soil. As a result, it is even clearer that the President’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act was part of a high-level national security mission that exists outside the realm of judicial interference.”
ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt told the judges during the same hearing that the Alien Enemies Act does not give the administration “a blank check” for a president to “use his war powers any time he considers it valuable.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Regardless of how Boasberg rules, the new filing made clear that the Trump administration views the fight as far from over.
“If, over defendants’ vehement legal and practical objections, the Court issues an injunction, defendants intend to immediately appeal, and will seek a stay pending appeal from this Court (and, if necessary, from the D.C. Circuit),” the Justice Department said.
Breanne Deppisch is a national politics reporter for Fox News Digital covering the Trump administration, with a focus on the Justice Department, FBI and other national news. She previously covered national politics at the Washington Examiner and The Washington Post, with additional bylines in Politico Magazine, the Colorado Gazette and others. You can send tips to Breanne at Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com, or follow her on X at @breanne_dep.