Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sparked controversy this week by mischaracterizing the fundamental legal right of habeas corpus during a Senate hearing, incorrectly asserting it was a presidential authority to deport immigrants.
Habeas corpus, a cornerstone of the U.S. legal system, is a constitutional protection against unlawful detention. It allows detainees to petition a court to challenge the legality of their imprisonment. Specifically, Article I of the U.S. Constitution delegates to Congress, not the president, the authority to suspend habeas corpus only under exceptional circumstances such as rebellion or invasion when public safety requires it.
During Senator Maggie Hassan's (D-NH) questioning, Secretary Noem stated, “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country and suspend their right to—” Senator Hassan immediately interrupted to correct the misstatement, clarifying that habeas corpus is not an executive power but a protective judicial right.
This exchange comes amid escalating concerns as the Trump administration intensifies immigration enforcement and considers suspending habeas corpus rights for immigrants facing deportation proceedings. Stephen Miller, a key architect of President Trump's immigration policy, recently indicated the administration might try to bypass judicial review to expedite deportations.
Historically, habeas corpus has been suspended in the U.S. on only four occasions, most recently following the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Each suspension involved explicit congressional authorization, except for President Abraham Lincoln's initial suspension during the Civil War in 1861, which Congress later backed in 1863 after judicial challenges.
At a separate congressional hearing, Noem acknowledged uncertainty when pressed further by Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) about the constitutional foundations of habeas corpus. She conceded she was unfamiliar with its placement in Article I, underscoring concerns among lawmakers about the administration's grasp of constitutional limits.
Legal experts widely concur that any suspension of habeas corpus without clear congressional approval would likely face swift judicial opposition, reflecting established constitutional checks designed to safeguard individual liberties against executive overreach.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday maintained a block on President Donald Trump's deportation efforts targeting Venezuelan migrants under a rarely invoked wartime statute from 1798, emphasizing the administration’s lack of proper legal procedure. In a brief, unsigned opinion, the Court agreed with attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union... Read More »
Migrants targeted for removal from the United States under the controversial Alien Enemies Act now have approximately 12 hours to decide whether to contest their deportation, according to recently unsealed court documents. The brief timeframe, disclosed on Thursday, has intensified legal challenges, with advocates arguing it violates the Supreme Court’s... Read More »
A contentious Texas law aimed at allowing state authorities to arrest and prosecute individuals suspected of illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border remains on hold following a recent decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The law, known as S.B. 4, has ignited a fierce dispute between the state... Read More »
On June 13, 2022, the Supreme Court issued a pair of opinions significantly undermining the rights of immigrants detained at the border. In one decision, the Court held that immigrants detained at the border are not entitled to a bond hearing after six months--in effect, allowing the government to detain... Read More »
