The legal challenges against President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act continue to mount. A Texas federal judge, David Briones, recently issued a resounding rejection of Trump’s attempt to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, marking the fifth such ruling against the former president.

In a comprehensive 56-page opinion, Judge Briones declared that Trump’s actions violated the Constitution’s due process guarantees. Crucially, the judge found that Trump failed to provide sufficient evidence that the Tren de Aragua gang constituted the kind of invasion necessary to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act. This decision aligns with four previous federal court rulings on the same matter, although it contrasts with at least one Pennsylvania court’s ruling.

Judge Briones’s decision, resulting in a permanent injunction, further complicates the legal landscape surrounding this issue and significantly increases the likelihood of Supreme Court intervention. While the Supreme Court has previously addressed aspects of the case, clarifying the due process requirements, they have yet to directly rule on the validity of Trump’s original proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act itself. The accumulating legal setbacks against Trump’s actions raise serious questions about the application and interpretation of this historical law.