A federal judge has ordered the government to bring 137 migrants deported to a secure El Salvador prison back to the United States and to pay their airfare, touching off a constitutional fight over the use of the Alien Enemies Act, national security, and who pays when judicial decisions collide with immigration enforcement. The order lands at the center of a broader dispute over deportations the administration says targeted violent gang members and terrorists, and it has set off predictable partisan fireworks in Washington.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg directed the Trump administration to facilitate returns for 137 noncitizens who were sent to CECOT in El Salvador, a detention facility the government describes as highly secure. In his ruling he stressed the financial burden on the plaintiffs, noting that it is “unclear why Plaintiffs should bear the financial cost of their return in such an instance,” and added that “this situation would never have arisen had the Government simply afforded Plaintiffs their constitutional rights before initially deporting them.”
This decision follows a long legal back-and-forth that saw the judge try to halt deportations under the Alien Enemies Act in March 2025, while the Supreme Court in April allowed the administration to continue using that wartime statute so long as detainees get notice and an opportunity to challenge allegations. The administration points to that high court permission as validation of its approach, but lower-court scrutiny and further litigation have kept the issue alive.
The Trump administration invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to remove people it says were violent gang members and foreign terrorists, including alleged affiliates of Tren de Aragua and MS-13, which the State Department designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations in February 2025. Officials sent many of those individuals to CECOT after determining they posed threats to public safety, and the administration has framed the removals as part of a serious security posture after years of porous borders and weak enforcement.
Department of Homeland Security leadership pushed back hard against the judge’s order and the publicity around the case. “Nothing has changed; in addition to being in our country illegally, these aliens are foreign terrorists designated as alien enemies by the President,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said, and she reiterated that “They were removed under the proper legal authorities. This case is no longer about the facts or law, but about Judge Boasberg’s crusade to stop President Trump from doing the will of the American People. He has been shut down by appellate courts again and again on this case.”
Republicans have been furious with Boasberg for months, labeling him part of a judiciary that, in their view, routinely overrides elected officials on immigration policy. The anger has escalated to talk of judicial accountability, with some GOP lawmakers publicly backing moves to challenge judges whom they see as obstructing enforcement of laws passed by Congress and policies carried out by the executive branch.
It remains unclear how many of the 137 will accept the court-ordered return; Boasberg warned that noncitizens “would be detained upon arrival” in the United States. The decision echoes another recent order requiring the government to fly back three families that a judge said ICE had unlawfully deported under an earlier humanitarian-parole settlement, signaling a trend where judges are increasingly stepping in to undo removals they find procedurally flawed.
Debate over the deportations is fueled by competing tallies of criminality among those sent to El Salvador. One review of a different group of 238 deportees suggested only a handful faced serious charges like attempted murder or armed robbery, while more had minor or nonviolent convictions. DHS counters that even people without U.S. rap sheets can be dangerous abroad, arguing that those labeled “‘non-criminals” by the media are “terrorists, human rights abusers, gang members and more — they just don’t have a rap sheet in the U.S.”
Darnell Thompkins is a conservative opinion writer from Atlanta, GA, known for his insightful commentary on politics, culture, and community issues. With a passion for championing traditional values and personal responsibility, Darnell brings a thoughtful Southern perspective to the national conversation. His writing aims to inspire meaningful dialogue and advocate for policies that strengthen families and empower individuals.