Staff Reports
A federal appellate judge threw down some seriously spicy rhetoric recently, likening the Trump administration’s treatment of Venezuelan gang members to the fate of Nazis during World War II. Judge Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee with a flair for drama, took aim at the Justice Department’s handling of deportations while gazing down at it from her perch in the appellate court. Her grievances arose from the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act—a 1798 relic that President Trump dusted off to rid the country of members of the Tren de Aragua gang who snuck in during the Biden era.
Millett seemed to be looking for a little more theatrics in her courtroom, claiming that Nazis somehow received better treatment under the same law. It raises the question of how far one must go with hyperbole before losing all touch with reality. Meanwhile, the Justice Department’s attorney was left scrambling to defend the legality of Trump’s swift actions, which intend to protect national security by swiftly removing dangerous individuals from American soil. Sadly, Millett’s flair for the dramatic only highlighted the ridiculousness of her comparison.
The president, using legal muscle dating back over two centuries, is cutting through bureaucratic red tape to deport gang suspects in record time. But immigration rights advocates are crying foul, arguing that the deported individuals were denied their chance to prove they’re not associated with criminal activities. After all, what’s a little thing like due process when national security is at stake? The cases are under judicial scrutiny as legal minds grapple with whether such speedy action can indeed be considered lawful or just a mockery of justice.
Judge blasts Trump’s deportations: ‘Nazis got better treatment’https://t.co/Hy2hyCCBp6 pic.twitter.com/jxpwFzO6Em
— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) March 24, 2025
Judge James Boasberg, another Obama appointee, stepped up to clarify the legal landscape. He decided to narrow down his focus to the matter of whether these Venezuelan individuals can contest their deportations before being whisked away. His point was clear: deporting them without a proper hearing is akin to a kangaroo court reminiscent of some dystopian novel. However, in a moment of clarity, he did not order any release, presumably keeping a tight grip on reality amidst the circus.
While Millett threw punches at both the Justice Department’s case and at Boasberg’s rulings, Judge Justin Walker, appointed by Trump himself, brought a breath of reality back to the discussion. He pointed out that there are legal channels available for those targeted for deportation to challenge their status. Such sentiment suggests that not all judges are ready to hop on the “let’s treat these gang members with kid gloves” bandwagon. It’s quite a dance, as one judge appears to be trying to reign in the government while another seems to be saying, “Hold your horses.”
The legal tussle continues, as the Circuit Court of Appeals deliberates on how to navigate this impressive double-play of judicial activism on one side and the need for national security on the other. Mr. Trump remains resolute in declaring that the Tren de Aragua is a terrorist organization linked directly to the Venezuelan government, allowing him to swing the Alien Enemies Act like a sword of Damocles. But, regardless of the ultimate outcome, one thing is certain: the courts are entirely willing to provide a platform for a Broadway-level showdown between political ideologies.
