Is US President Donald Trump’s administration going too far in enforcing immigration laws? The US justice system plays a crucial role in clarifying this question. Two decisions were made in courts at the weekend, which once again show that the outcome of a procedure often depends on which judge is presiding, as the legal basis is often not clearly regulated.
The two decisions related to the US government’s immigration policy: In Minnesota A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the state and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul against the government’s immigration operations there. According to the judge, the plaintiffs failed to prove that the government exceeded a constitutional limit by deploying approximately 3,000 officials. That would otherwise have justified an injunction. The fatal shootings of two citizens in recent weeks played no role.
On the same day, however, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the five-year-old Liam Rabbit Ramos and his father would have to be released from detention pending deportation. Their arrest in Minneapolis and subsequent transport to a detention center in Texas were unconstitutional. In his ruling, the judge criticized the government’s “ignorance” of the American Declaration of Independence and called for “more humane policies” from the Trump administration.
The two federal judges in the two cases mentioned above were each appointed to their positions by Democratic presidents. Nevertheless, one of the verdicts can be seen as a success for the Republican government, the other as a minor setback.
How do such different decisions come about?
In the United States, federal laws trump state laws. Since the issue of immigration and the enforcement of immigration laws Agencies like ICE are subject to the federal government, legal disputes are heard in almost all cases in federal courts. There are a total of 94 federal courts across the United States where criminal and civil law issues are heard. In the second instance, a legal dispute then goes to one of the 13 federal appeals courts. The final and highest instance is the American Supreme Court. Cases relating to immigration issues would ultimately end up there.
Even though the vast majority of immigration and deportation cases end up in federal court, the state courts also have a job: This could result in ICE employees who violate the law in their workbe prosecuted by the state authorities under criminal and civil law.
This also applies to ICE employees: “Our state and local authorities can arrest federal officials if they violate California law – and if convicted, the President cannot pardon them,” said Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Kevin Mullen in a joint statement in October. And: “Although the president may enjoy absolute immunity thanks to an unlawful Supreme Court, this does not apply to those who act on his behalf.”
Lawyers are currently arguing about the question of what form of immunity ICE employees and border guards from Customs and Border Protection have. What is clear is that they do not have “absolute immunity” as Vice President JD Vance announced.
To date, only a few states have prosecuted ICE employees. Perhaps the ongoing situation in Minnesota, as well as the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officials to do something about it.
Who cares about the law?
However, President Donald Trump and his administration have proven in the first year of his second term that legal defeats have little impact on their policies.
The US legal system is simply not able to cope with an attack by the Trump administration. President Trump and his administration are making decisions on an assembly line; The legal consequences of these are initially only briefly discussed. Behind this lies the knowledge that the wheels of justice grind slowly.
However, by the time a court hearing takes place, a government decision may have already had a lasting impact on the lives of those affected.
An example of this is the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. This was carried out despite a court order El Salvador deported. He was imprisoned there for several months – even though a federal court quickly ruled that the Trump administration had to bring him back. A decision that was confirmed by the Supreme Court. After returning to the United States, he was arrested again. However, a federal court once again ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released. Nevertheless, the Trump administration continues to try to deport the father of the family to a third country.