US Court Orders Return of Deported Venezuelan Immigrants
This week, the US Court of Appeals ruled that a lower court’s decision must be followed, effectively requiring the return of two 20-year-old Venezuelan immigrants deported to El Salvador this past March. It seems like yet another chapter in ongoing legal disputes regarding alien enemy laws.
The ruling, which passed by a 2-1 vote in the Fourth Circuit, supports US District Judge Stephanie Gallagher’s earlier decision. She had concluded that Daniel Rozano Camargo, who had been described as a “Christian,” should be allowed to re-enter the country.
Judge Gallagher, appointed during Trump’s presidency, found that the deportation of Lozano Camargo violated an agreement involving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This agreement was meant to protect certain migrant groups — those who had entered the US as children and later sought asylum from deportation. In fact, many of these immigrants eventually were granted asylum rights through the court.
The ruling now leaves the door open for the Trump administration to take this matter to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Gallagher indicated that the government would need to create a timeline for returning the young immigrants to the US.
The federal judge’s command for the return of the exiled immigrants notably dismisses Trump’s request.
The Justice Department had appealed to the Fourth Circuit at the beginning of the month.
In the majority opinion, which was issued late Monday, the court rejected the administration’s appeal and emphasized the judiciary’s role in upholding the law. “We’re, unfortunately, confronting administrative attempts to undermine the rule of law,” stated Justice Deandrea Gist Benjamin, who represented the majority. “Our duty is to act as a protective barrier against political moves that may infringe on constitutional rights, even when such actions are framed as serving public safety.”
Additionally, Judge Benjamin remarked that the government’s actions denied Lozano Camargo the legal protections he rightfully deserved.
Focus on Immigration Processing
In April, Judge Gallagher had already ruled that the government failed to honor a 2024 settlement between DHS and a group of asylum seekers, including Lozano Camargo. This settlement explicitly stated that the department would not deport these minors until their cases were fully adjudicated.
Last month, she noted that Camargo’s deportation amounted to a “breach of contract,” as his asylum claim had yet to be resolved. She ordered that the U.S. government facilitate his return. A lawyer from the Trump administration, however, argued that Lozano Camargo’s prior drug-related conviction made him eligible for deportation under the alien enemy laws, even implying he had gang ties without strong evidence.
In her recent ruling, Gallagher reiterated that the minor infractions alleged against Lozano Camargo shouldn’t overshadow the central issue: the integrity of the immigration process itself. She stressed that it was not merely about whether he could eventually remain in the country.
She conveyed serious concerns regarding the administration’s approach, indicating that they were misjudging how to assess the value of his situation, and pointedly remarked on the importance of following procedural safeguards, regardless of the outcomes in specific cases.
It remains uncertain whether the Trump administration will indeed escalate this case to the Supreme Court. The complexities and implications of the ruling, especially concerning individual rights, are yet to fully unfold.
