A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Trump’s attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, and honestly? It’s not surprising. While deporting violent criminals should be a top priority, using an obscure wartime law to do so was a mistake—legally, politically, and strategically.

There’s no doubt that Tren de Aragua has no business being in the United States. This is a gang that thrives on kidnapping, extortion, drug trafficking, contract killings, and human smuggling. The fact that we even have to argue about deporting them shows how broken our immigration and legal system is. However, Trump’s choice of weapon in this fight—the Alien Enemies Act—was not the right tool for the job.

Let’s break this down.

The Criminals Need to Go—Yesterday

First, let’s establish what should be common sense: Tren de Aragua is a serious threat to public safety, and its members should be deported immediately. This isn’t even a debate. The gang originated in Venezuela and has spread like a disease across South America and into the U.S., bringing with it a wave of violent crime.

These aren’t misunderstood youths who made a few bad choices. These are violent thugs who have no respect for law and order. Their specialty? Taking advantage of weak borders and bureaucratic delays.

Trump is absolutely right to want them gone. In fact, this should have been handled a long time ago. No nation with a functioning legal system should allow violent foreign criminals to stay within its borders.

But here’s the problem: how you remove them matters.

The Alien Enemies Act? That’s a Stretch

Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law that allows the president to expel foreign nationals during wartime if they pose a threat to national security. It sounds tough, but here’s the issue:

• This law was meant for wars between nations, not gang violence.
• Heather Digby Parton from Salon correctly pointed out that this is more akin to dealing with organized crime than an act of war.
• David A. Graham from The Atlantic noted that the fact that Tren de Aragua is a vicious gang doesn’t mean the AEA applies to them. The law is what it is, and trying to stretch it for political convenience sets a dangerous precedent.

The moment Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act, he gave activist judges and left-wing politicians an easy legal excuse to block the deportations. Why give the opposition such an easy win?

If he had used existing immigration and criminal laws, he would have had a stronger legal footing and a much harder case for any court to block. Instead, this move played right into the hands of his political enemies.

What Trump Should Have Done Instead

So, if Trump truly wanted to deport these criminals quickly and legally, he had better options.

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board made a brilliant suggestion:

“Why didn’t Trump send them to Guantanamo Bay for immigration hearings and due process?”

That may sound extreme, but think about it:

• Guantanamo already exists to handle high-risk detainees.
• It would have ensured that these criminals couldn’t just be released into the U.S. while awaiting their hearings.
• It would have prevented this kind of legal pushback, since the gang members could be processed under strict national security measures.

Had Trump taken that approach, we’d be talking about how he successfully deported these criminals, not about how a judge blocked his order.

Was This Just a Political Stunt?

Here’s where things get interesting.

Andrew C. McCarthy from National Review suggests this was a calculated move—not necessarily to deport criminals, but to pick a political fight that would make Democrats look bad. And let’s be honest, it worked.

Most Americans aren’t reading through legal arguments about the Alien Enemies Act. All they see is:

✅ Trump tried to deport violent gang members.
❌ A liberal judge blocked him.

That plays right into Trump’s hands politically. It makes him look like the tough-on-crime leader, while Democrats and the courts look like they’re protecting illegal immigrant criminals.

The problem is, while the optics help Trump, the actual legal consequences are far more complicated. Some of the gang members were deported despite the court order, which may create a legal firestorm that ultimately delays or obstructs future deportations. Worse, the administration’s defiance of the order could give activist judges and immigration lawyers ammunition to challenge deportations more aggressively, potentially granting these criminals even more legal protections than they had before. Instead of securing a decisive victory, Trump’s approach risks turning a clear-cut case for removal into a prolonged legal battle.

The Bigger Picture: Law and Order, Not Legal Chaos

Trump won the election in large part because Americans are fed up with illegal immigration, weak borders, and rising crime. But cutting legal corners isn’t the way to fix it.

If anything, Trump’s biggest advantage over Democrats should be that he follows the law, rather than bending it to fit his agenda.

The Wall Street Journal summed it up perfectly:

“Mr. Trump won the election on a promise to deport illegal migrants, especially criminals and Tren de Aragua. His voters will be happy he is fulfilling that promise. But he has to do it within the bounds of American law, or he will take the country down a dangerous road that echoes of the way the Biden Administration abused the justice system. Mr. Trump was elected to stop that, not imitate it.”

This is exactly the problem. We want Trump to fix the system, not abuse it. If Republicans start normalizing legal loopholes, they’ll have no ground to stand on when Democrats inevitably do the same.

There is a right way and a wrong way to remove dangerous criminals. The right way? Enforce the law as it is written, close the loopholes, and deport criminals through established legal processes. The wrong way? Stretch a 200-year-old war law to fit a political narrative.

Final Thoughts

At the end of the day:

• Tren de Aragua needs to be deported. No debate there.
• Trump should have used existing laws, not a questionable war act.
• His legal approach gave the courts an easy excuse to block him.
• This may have been more about politics than actual immigration enforcement.

Trump has a real opportunity here. Instead of picking fights he knows will be blocked, he should be focused on closing loopholes, fixing immigration enforcement, and removing criminals in a way that sticks.

Winning this fight the right way will make his victory undeniable. Cutting corners? That just gives his opponents ammunition to stop him.

America needs law and order, not legal chaos. Trump can deliver that—but only if he plays it smart.