Trump's immigration push has suffered by far the worst legal failure in Texas border area

Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. The 56-year-old, nominated by President Trump, turned his high-back leather chair to a government lawyer in the Federal Court of Brownsville, Texas, and asked a question. Can the president define what an invasion is, then declare an invasion happening, and then use the war powers of 1798 to expel the so-called invaders?

“Yes,” replied Michael Velchik, a lawyer at the Department of Justice.

Judge Rodriguez followed up: This would not make Mr. Trump’s power “effectively unlimited” under the Wartime Act?

The question hints at a groundbreaking ruling in which Judge Rodriguez found on Thursday that Mr. Trump claimed that Tren de Aragua's activity was an activity of the Venezuelan gang in the United States constituted an “invasion” that constituted a “invasion” invoking wartime laws.

The decision is by far the most comprehensive ruling of a federal judge blocking the most aggressive lawsuits Mr. Trump has been used on March 15 to deport nearly 140 Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador. This is after the Supreme Court ruling in early April, the decision was faced with a potential deliberation of the heart of expulsion in early April. Prosecutions can be filed under the Foreign Enemy Act In the district court where he was detained.

The result of the court order is a challenge to the key part of the Mr. Trump immigration agenda that began in Washington, which started across the country, filled the docks of federal judges and raised tough and skeptical questions, even from jurists with incredible certificates of conservativeness.

Judge Rodriguez's order came after five other judges heard a challenge with the temporary order issued by the Alien Enemies Act, which prevented some or all of the deportations held in their areas. In Colorado, judges found that without “military and wartime operations,” there would be no “invasion” and that the government “improperly” relies on these words as a legal basis for deportation.

The wide network of immigration and customs law enforcement detention centers in Texas is starting to play a great role in litigation. Judge Rodriguez is one of three judges in Texas, and so far they have heard the challenges of the Venezuelan group. When one of his colleagues, Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern Texas area, refused to stop the impending deportation of another group of Venezuelans held in Anson Blueskin Detention Center, the Supreme Court stepped in and issued an emergency order to stop it.

In another case, David Briones of western Texas ordered the immediate release of a Venezuelan couple, rejecting the government's claim that they were members of Tren de Aragua.

The Texas case is also worth noting, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reviewed the federal court there, the most active conservative appeals court, which has issued many rulings supporting hardline immigration policies.

The possibility of appealing to the Fifth Circuit prompted the belief that the Texas court might provide Mr. Trump with the best chance to win a ruling, which would allow his administration to plan to expand progress on mass deportation.

Stephen Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University’s Law Center, said that this makes the suspicion he faces there particularly noteworthy. “The government may be so confident in the fight that it hears these cases in Texas,” he said. “There are some legal issues that would disagree from a reasonable meeting of judges within the ideological range. But whether we are from an invasion with Tren de Aragua or other engagement with others, it is not one of them.”

A White House spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

Judge Rodriguez on March 14 at the origin of the El Valle Detention Center 50 miles north of Brownsville. From there, despite orders from another Washington judge, James E. Boasberg, two buses carrying more than 200 men heading to Harlingen Airport for El Salvador, but they were asked to return.

Mr. Trump trained Judge Boasberg to portray him as a radical liberal. The president may want to hold a more friendly reception in front of Judge Rodriguez, with three men working to prosecute after the Supreme Court ruling.

Judge Rodriguez sat less than a mile from the Mexican border. Every weekday, from the first floor below his courtroom, the U.S. Marshal would present a group of border crossing parades, some of which were still in streetwear, some of whom were arrested hours ago. They stood five and six at a time on Thursday, when some men stood at trial, some sipped from Whataburger cups, while others waived their right to a jury trial and pleaded guilty.

Nevertheless, Judge Rodriguez has not immediately accepted the immense measures the administration has taken to restart the immigration system, suggesting that Mr. Trump’s claim on his level of power may be too big for some of his judicial candidates.

Two weeks before the hearing, Justice Rodriguez issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the government from using the Alien Enemy Act to deport three plaintiffs or any other El Valle detainees.

Brownsville immigration attorney Jodi Goodwin said the breakthrough with Mr. Trump was surprising, and he often appeared before judges. Ms Goodwin said in two federal judges in Brownsville that Justice Rodriguez was called “a more conservative, stricter judge.”

Judge Rodriguez, who declined to comment on this article, was the first Latino Mr. Trump chose for federal judges. During the 2017 confirmation hearing, the judge spoke about being raised by a single mother and living near the poverty line. He went to Yale, the first in his family to attend a four-year college, then the University of Texas Law School, and then established a partnership at the powerful Houston company Baker Botts. For eight years, he worked overseas at the International Justice Mission, an evangelical Christian organization fighting human trafficking. He told the Senate, “All these experiences have allowed me to empathize with the disadvantaged, the poor and those in disadvantaged situations.”

During the immigration hearing, Judge Rodriguez took a careful, curious approach in reviewing the claim of the term “invasion”, a keyword in which the Regulations and Mr. Trump invoked the War Powers Act on March 14. The judge said he was looking for the “ordinary meaning” that the word understood in 1798.

Mr Velchik said “invasion” and “predatory invasion” could be applied to non-state actors like “Indian Tribes” and “Barbary Pirates.” But Mr. Velchik was empty when Justice Rodriguez asked him to support it with “from that time the source”. Attempting to discern the original meaning of the law, a conservative jurisprudence staple used to protect gun owner rights and limit abortion rights, seems to be opposing the government’s agenda.

Elsewhere in Brownsville, there are broader questions about whether Mr. Trump’s immigration method is consistent with local traditions. In February, immigration and customs enforcement raided Abby's bakery, a pastry shop away Brownsville. They found workers living on the property of the owner. According to the complaint filed in court, two were not proven; six visas visited the United States but did not work. The two owners were charged with possession of aliens and committing crimes, with a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. They pleaded not guilty and their trial was scheduled for Judge Rodriguez in July.

Jaime M. Diez, an attorney representing the owner of the bakery, said the case has despised ranchers for seasonal immigration to the board of directors who serve as ranchers, a practice for generations in the region. “Everyone is scared,” he said. “They have been arresting people on both sides.”

At the end of the hearing, Judge Rodriguez checked whether the government plans to bring detainees to the Supreme Court order to challenge their detainees, asking them to allow them to prosecute “a reasonable time”. He asked the detainee how to challenge it. He said they would not be hurt if they could apply in some way. But if they can’t apply, the government can take them to El Salvador outside the scope of the U.S. court.

“From my point of view, there is a capture of 22,” the judge said.

Immigration lawyer Ms Goodwin said that 12 hours were insufficient given Mr. Trump's time since he took office. “My client is petrified,” she said. “'Are they going to my house? Are they going to school? Can I go to the doctor? You are a lawyer. Can't you do something?” I spent a lot of time just trying to calm my fear. ”

Muneer Ahmad, a professor at Yale Law School, represented immigrants as part of the school’s workers and immigration rights advocacy clinic, called Judge Rodriguez’s ruling “good” and “important.”

“To make the Trump-appointed judge rule so clearly that the invocation of the statute is illegal, and I hope to speed up the end of this legal scope,” he said.

Alan Feuer Contribution report, and Kitty Bennett Contributed to the research.