(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 ruling, extended its injunction that temporarily bars the Trump administration from removing Venezuelan immigrants from the United States under the Alien Enemies Act proclamation and remanded the case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to resolve the question of how much time should be afforded for detainees to contest their removals.
The majority said the government did not provide migrants targeted under the wartime authority with enough time or information to contest their cases.
“The detainees’ interests at stake are accordingly particularly weighty. Under these circumstances, notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster,” the majority wrote in the decision. “But it is not optimal for this Court, far removed from the circumstances on the ground, to determine in the first instance the precise process necessary to satisfy the Constitution in this case.”
The justices did not reach the question of the lawfulness of the removals under the Alien Enemies Act.
“We recognize the significance of the Government’s national security interests as well as the necessity that such interests be pursued in a manner consistent with the Constitution. In light of the foregoing, lower courts should address AEA cases expeditiously,” they wrote.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Earlier this week, the Trump administration asked the court to lift its injunction, arguing that the migrants it intended to deport under the act were dangerous.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Former President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden will appear on ABC’s “The View” on Thursday for their first joint interview since leaving the White House.
The pair will join the co-hosts live in-studio to discuss life post-presidency, the Democratic Party’s losses in 2024, and the current political landscape as President Donald Trump passes the 100-day mark of his second term.
The Bidens have kept a relatively low profile since leaving Washington in January, though the former president is beginning to ratchet up his public appearances.
Joe Biden’s first major speech since departing the White House came last month in Chicago, when he rebuked the Trump administration’s approach to Social Security, accusing officials of “taking a hatchet” to the agency and more broadly causing “so much damage” to the federal government. Biden has appeared occasionally since.
In his first post-presidency interview, broadcast on the BBC on Wednesday, Biden sharply critiqued the current administration on a host of issues: He likened Trump’s push for a peace deal that would have Ukraine cede territory to Russia to “modern-day appeasement,” and blasted Trump’s threats to acquire Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal.
“What president ever talks like that?” Biden said. “That’s not who we are. We’re about freedom, democracy, opportunity — not about confiscation.”
Trump, for his part, routinely criticizes Biden as “the worst president in American history” and blames him for various difficulties in his own administration, including recent stock market turmoil and a decline in U.S. gross domestic product.
Biden’s presidency marked the culmination of a career in public service that spanned more than five decades, including 36 years as a senator and eight years as vice president. He leaves behind a complex legacy, punctuated by Trump’s historic victory in November.
Biden and his team were criticized for his decision to seek reelection and later withdraw after a poor debate performance against Trump that moved some Democrats to publicly question his ability as he approached the age of 82 to campaign for and serve another term.
Even still, Biden and his allies have maintained a belief that he could have beaten Trump had he stayed in the race. He’s said he decided to drop out and endorse then-Vice President Kamala Harris to help unify the party.
Asked by the BBC if he should have dropped out earlier, Biden said it wouldn’t have had an impact on the outcome.
“I don’t, I don’t think it would have mattered. We left at a time when we had a good candidate, she’s fully funded,” Biden said.
“I meant what I said when I started, that I think I’m prepared to hand this to the next generation, a transition government,” Biden added. “But things moved so quickly that it made it difficult to walk away from the ticket and it was a hard decision. But regret that? No, I think it was the right decision. I think that, well, it was just a difficult decision.”
Jill Biden, 73, who has also begun stepping up public appearances, has also emphasized she believes her husband would have been able to serve four more years.
“Sure,” she told the Washington Post in an interview before the Bidens left the White House in January. “I mean, today, I think he has a full schedule. He started early with interviews and briefings, and it just keeps going.”
More broadly, the Bidens’ appearance on “The View” comes as Democrats are in the midst of rebuilding their coalition and retooling some parts of their message; and grappling with what role — if any — the former president should play in the future of the party.
Two key electoral races this year will stress test those changes: gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey. It’s unclear if Joe Biden will be involved in campaigning.
Both Joe Biden and Harris have signed with the CAA talent agency.
Meanwhile, Jill Biden, who retired from her longtime teaching career in December, was recently named as chair of the recently launched Milken Institute’s Women’s Health Network, which will promote research and investments for women’s health.
Speaking about the initiative in Los Angeles on Monday, Jill Biden said that she does not think the federal government will be as involved with women’s health investments and research as it used to be.
“I think this is really an opportunity for business, for private equity to, you know, it doesn’t seem like the federal government is really going to be as involved as they were … I think we all have a part to play in every aspect of this,” Biden said when discussing what excited her about the initiative.
She was seemingly referencing federal government cuts, which have heavily hit health research initiatives as well, although she did not call out the White House or any figures explicitly.
-ABC News’ Michelle Stoddart contributed to this report.
Office of the President of Ukraine via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump reflected on the dramatic meeting he had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy inside St. Peter’s Basilica just before the pope’s funeral on Saturday, when asked by ABC News anchor and Senior National Correspondent Terry Moran in an exclusive interview Tuesday in the Oval Office.
Noting the striking photograph of the two men “talking peace” that “went around the world,” Moran asked Trump, “Take us into that moment.”
“The moment was a moment of solace in a sense, because — tremendous numbers of people are dying. A lot of his people are dying,” Trump answered. “They’re being killed, and I feel very badly about it,” he said.
It was the first time Trump and Zelenskyy had met face-to-face since their heated argument in the Oval Office in February.
At the time, Zelenskyy contended the Russian president needed stronger pushback from Ukraine’s allies.
“I really count on your strong position to stop Putin,” Zelenskyy said to Trump at the February meeting.
Moran noted that Trump has since appeared to have changed his thinking about Putin’s intentions, bringing up what Trump said in a social media post after his conversation with Zelenskyy in St. Peter’s.
“There was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, in cities and towns, over the last few days,” he said in the post. “It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war. He’s just tapping me along.”
Trump repeated those comments in the interview.
“It’s possible. Yeah, that’s possible. Sure,” he said. “He could be tapping me along a little bit. I would say that he would like to stop the war.”
When Moran asked if Trump truly believed Putin wanted to end the war even with the continued attacks, Trump claimed that negotiations would have been much worse under a different president.
“You think Vladimir Putin wants peace?” Moran asked.
“I think he does, yes. I think he does,” he answered.
“Still?” Moran said.
“I think because of me … ” Trump continued.
“Even with the raining missiles on …?” Moran asked.
“I think he really– his– his– his dream was to take over the whole country. I think because of me, he’s not gonna do that,” Trump answered.
Asked if he trusts Putin, Trump said, “I don’t trust a lot of people. But I do think this. I think that he … let’s say he respects me,” he said.
(WASHINGTON) — In a sneaky legislative maneuver tied into the effort to pass a funding bill and avert a government shutdown, House Republicans earlier this week successfully blocked Democrats from forcing votes and debate on President Donald Trump’s controversial tariffs.
It was a somewhat complicated move. But it worked — and demonstrated that Republicans are attempting to give cover to Trump and his implementation of sweeping tariffs on top U.S. trading partners that have roiled the stock market and stoked diplomatic tensions.
Had Democrats forced a vote and debate on the tariffs, it could have forced Republicans to go on the record on Trump’s tariff agenda — perhaps splitting with the president’s actions.
To tee up Speaker Mike Johnson’s temporary government funding bill, which the House passed Tuesday evening, the House first needed to pass what’s known as “a rule.” Buried inside the text of that rule was legislative language that prevents Democrats from forcing a potentially politically painful vote to end Trump’s tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China.
How could Democrats compel a vote to end the tariffs?
Trump imposed tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China by declaring illegal migration and fentanyl constituted a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the National Emergencies Act.
But, here’s the catch: under the NEA, Congress has the authority to move quickly to terminate that emergency declaration. Top House Democrats tried to do that last week.
But inside that rule, which passed along party lines and cleared the way for a vote on the House GOP’s stopgap funding bill, was a provision prohibiting lawmakers from forcing a vote to terminate the president’s border emergency and the resulting tariffs until at least January 2026.
The section reads, “Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.”
Democrats are blasting the move.
“Guess what they tucked into this rule, hoping nobody would notice? They slipped in a little clause letting them escape ever having to debate or vote on Trump’s tariffs. Isn’t that clever?” Rep. Jim McGovern, the ranking member on the House Rules Committee, said during floor debate Tuesday.
Congress could still approve a joint resolution to terminate the president’s national emergency. That would require the support of both rank-and-file GOP lawmakers and House Republican leadership, which is unlikely.
Democratic Rep. Don Beyer blasted the maneuver on “ABC News Live Prime with Linsey Davis” Tuesday.
Asked about the Republicans’ move and if Democrats have any way around it, Beyer said “not really,” calling it “tragic.”
“Once again, Trump has ignored existing law and the Constitution with all the tariffs he’s been announcing in recent weeks,” Beyer said. “He inherited on Jan. 20 the strongest economy this country has ever had. And we are rapidly heading towards recession right now just because of the extraordinary uncertainty in business decisions and capital investment and hiring decisions.”
