President Donald Trump’s administration is considering a controversial move: suspending habeas corpus, the constitutional right that allows people to challenge their detention in court.
This decision is part of his ongoing crackdown on immigration, which has sparked heated debates and legal challenges.
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller recently told reporters that the option is on the table.
“The Constitution is clear… that the privilege of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,” Miller explained, adding that this possibility is actively being explored.
What Would Suspending Habeas Corpus Mean?
If implemented, suspending habeas corpus could allow the administration to bypass traditional court procedures in immigration cases, speeding up deportations.
However, this action would almost certainly be met with legal opposition and would likely make its way to the Supreme Court.
Historically, suspensions of habeas corpus have been rare, with the most notable instances being during the Civil War and after the Pearl Harbor attack.
Trump’s Tough Immigration Stance
Trump’s immigration policies have been central to his political agenda, particularly his commitment to removing undocumented migrants from the U.S.
He has consistently described their presence as an “invasion.”
Since taking office, he’s faced resistance from federal courts, which have insisted that migrants targeted for deportation receive due process.
Despite not explicitly mentioning habeas corpus before, Trump has hinted at extreme measures.
Last month, he discussed potential solutions to bypass nationwide injunctions that hinder his deportation efforts.
“There’s one way that’s been used by three very highly respected presidents… but we hope we don’t have to go that route,” he told reporters.
Legal Experts Challenge Miller’s Views on Habeas Corpus
Legal experts have pushed back on Miller’s interpretation of the Constitution.
Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor and current CNN senior legal analyst, criticized the idea.
“The Constitution makes it clear that suspension of habeas corpus is only justified in cases of actual rebellion or invasion, posing a direct threat to public safety,” he explained.
According to Honig, Congress has never authorized deportations without court involvement, as Miller suggests.
Controversial Deportations Under the Alien Enemies Act
Trump’s administration has already taken aggressive actions to deport migrants under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA), a wartime law.
In March, the U.S. deported hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador, using the AEA to justify their removal.
However, multiple courts have blocked further deportations under this law, with the Supreme Court ruling that these individuals must be allowed to challenge their deportations in court.
The AEA was historically used during wartime, such as the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II, and many judges have rejected its use under the current administration.
Some have argued that the U.S. is not currently under “invasion” as required by the AEA for it to apply.
The Case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia: A Legal Blowback
One of the most high-profile deportations involved Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant living in Maryland with a work permit.
He was deported to El Salvador in March, despite having a legal protective order to stay in the U.S.
The administration later admitted that his deportation was an error.
However, despite an order from the U.S. Supreme Court to facilitate his return, Trump has refused to intervene, arguing that only the Salvadoran government can address the situation.
Trump’s Position on Due Process
In a recent interview, Trump cast doubt on whether immigrants in the U.S. are entitled to due process under the Constitution.
When asked about the issue, he responded, “I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer.”
He went on to suggest that following due process for millions of migrants would lead to a backlog of legal cases.
Despite his comments, the Fifth Amendment guarantees due process of law, and the 14th Amendment ensures equal protection under the law.
Trump, however, remains firm on his stance, emphasizing that he was elected to remove “the worst, most dangerous people” from the country, despite the courts holding him back.
The Supreme Court’s Involvement
The Supreme Court has already weighed in, temporarily blocking Trump’s deportation efforts for a group of Venezuelan migrants accused of being gang members.
Trump’s administration has asked the Court to lift or narrow this order, but the legal battles are far from over.
With his hardline approach to immigration facing mounting legal challenges, Trump’s next steps remain unclear.
Whether or not he proceeds with suspending habeas corpus will likely depend on the ongoing legal proceedings and the decisions of higher courts.