On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr.—appointed by President Trump himself—issued a permanent injunction against the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) of 1798 to deport alleged members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. For those of us who stand at the intersection of faith, constitutional conservatism, and common sense, this case offers more than just legal drama. It raises critical questions about the limits of executive power, the meaning of national security, and how we, as a nation rooted in both justice and mercy, handle immigration and the rule of law.

Let’s break it down—thoughtfully, biblically, and conservatively.

The Judge’s Ruling: Lawful Boundaries or Legal Overreach?

First, the facts. The Trump administration sought to use the Alien Enemies Act—originally passed in 1798 during hostilities with France—to deport individuals they deemed part of a foreign criminal invasion. The logic: this gang, Tren de Aragua, is not just another group of thugs. They’re organized, international, and terrifyingly violent. But Judge Rodriguez ruled that the AEA applies strictly during wartime and only against enemy aliens affiliated with a hostile government or force. Since Venezuela isn’t officially at war with us, and the gang isn’t an organized military force per se, the judge declared that the administration had no legal ground to invoke this statute for deportation purposes.

From a strictly legal perspective, the judge isn’t out in left field here. The AEA is a very narrowly-written law. It was designed for wartime, not drug-running gangs hiding in stash houses in Texas. The judge’s ruling reflects a textualist reading of the law, which many conservatives (myself included) usually champion. It’s about sticking to the Constitution and not letting emotions drive policy—no matter how terrifying the threat might feel.

The Bible reminds us that justice must be fair and principled, not reactionary. “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty…” (Leviticus 19:15). Whether dealing with a criminal alien or a corrupt billionaire, justice is to be blind and impartial.

The Administration’s Argument: Gang Invasion or Legal Stretch?

Now, let’s look at it from the Trump camp’s side. And let’s be honest—this administration is tapping into real frustration and fear among everyday Americans. Communities along the southern border are feeling abandoned. They’re dealing with the fallout of mass illegal immigration, cartel violence, fentanyl trafficking, and, yes, brutal gangs like Tren de Aragua. The administration’s stance is: “If it walks like an invasion and kills like an invasion, it is an invasion.”

Vice President J.D. Vance doubled down on this logic, arguing that the President alone determines when an invasion occurs. In other words, if the executive branch sees fit to invoke emergency powers to protect national security, courts should respect that judgment. The administration is pushing back hard, preparing an appeal, and leaning into a doctrine of strong, decisive executive action—especially when it comes to border security.

This resonates with many Christian conservatives, because it’s rooted in a legitimate concern: government’s God-given role is to protect the innocent and punish evildoers (Romans 13:4). And if the federal government won’t secure the border or defend Americans from violence, what is it good for?

But here’s the tension: in defending our borders, we can’t trample on the Constitution. Using a wartime law to shortcut due process, without Congressional backing or a formal declaration of conflict, sets a dangerous precedent—even if it feels like the only option in a broken system.

The Real Problem: A Broken Immigration System and Congressional Cowardice

At the end of the day, this whole mess is a symptom of a deeper disease: Congress has refused to fix our immigration laws for decades. Both Republicans and Democrats have kicked the can down the road—either chasing cheap labor or courting future voters. Meanwhile, the people suffer, and presidents try to patch holes in the system with executive duct tape.

It doesn’t take a prophet to see the truth here. Scripture says, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3). When our legal and moral foundations are crumbling—when the law is twisted to fit political agendas on both sides—we end up with situations like this.

Constitutional Boundaries Must Guide Righteous Action

So where does that leave us?

We must demand both secure borders and constitutional fidelity. We should be unafraid to call evil what it is—yes, criminal gangs are a form of domestic terrorism. Yes, illegal immigration is spiraling out of control. But we can’t fix these things by abusing wartime laws or expanding executive power beyond its constitutional limits. That’s how empires fall.

Our faith calls us to justice and mercy. Our Constitution demands limits and liberty. And common sense tells us that Congress must stop passing the buck. If Tren de Aragua is an invading force, then let Congress declare it. If current immigration law doesn’t adequately address the current crises, then reform it. And if the border is broken, fix it—legally, thoroughly, and urgently.

Until then, let’s not build a kingdom on shaky foundations, or swap our God-given liberties for a false sense of security.