Deportations Push the U.S. ‘Beyond’ a Constitutional Crisis, Says Legal Expert

The Trump Administration is facing growing backlash from legal experts and political leaders after it appeared to openly ignore multiple court orders over the weekend. These actions have intensified fears that the U.S. may be entering — or has already entered — a constitutional crisis.

Defying Court Orders

One of the most concerning events took place on Saturday, when a federal judge ordered the U.S. government to stop the deportation of a group of Venezuelan detainees. The judge, James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, explicitly instructed that deportation flights should be turned around. However, federal officials allowed the planes to continue on to El Salvador.

USCIS taking too long? Discover how a Mandamus lawsuit can get your case moving.

Criminal Immigration Lawyer - Expert Help is Just a Click Away --> Contact us now! (212) 566-3572

Learn How a Writ of Mandamus Can Help

In a provocative move, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele — an ally of Trump — announced that the 238 Venezuelans would be held in the country’s high-security “Terrorism Confinement Center” for at least a year. He even mocked the U.S. judge’s order in a social media post, saying, “Oopsie … Too late.” That post was shared and supported by officials in the Trump Administration. Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly thanked Bukele, while ignoring the court’s ruling.

The day before, in a separate case in Boston, a judge issued a restraining order to stop the deportation of Dr. Rasha Alawieh, a Lebanese-born U.S. visa holder and medical professor at Brown University. She had returned to the U.S. from Lebanon and was detained upon arrival. Even though the judge ordered she be kept in the country and brought to court, she was deported anyway.

Undermining the Rule of Law

These actions are deeply troubling to legal scholars who believe the executive branch — in this case, the President and his administration — is overstepping its constitutional limits.

Kim Wehle, a law professor and former U.S. attorney, stated that the country has gone “far beyond” a constitutional crisis. She explained that when one branch of government, such as the executive, begins ignoring the authority of another branch, like the judiciary or Congress, it creates a dangerous imbalance of power.

Wehle pointed out that the Trump Administration has already shown a pattern of ignoring Congress’s authority, such as spending federal money without congressional approval and firing officials without legal justification. Now, by disregarding court orders, she argues, the executive branch is acting as if it is above the law.

A Tipping Point?

Other experts are more cautious in their assessment. Amanda Frost, a professor at the University of Virginia and director of its Immigration, Migration, and Human Rights Program, said she is concerned but does not yet consider the situation a full constitutional crisis. She noted that the Administration has not officially said it will no longer obey the courts — although their actions suggest they are skirting the edges.

“I’m very concerned and think they’re being very disingenuous,” Frost said. “But I would not say that they have yet crossed the line of suggesting they no longer feel that they need to abide by the rule of law.”

Still, signs of defiance are growing. Trump’s immigration advisor Tom Homan appeared on Fox News and brushed off the court orders, saying, “We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think.”

Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed that the administration is following the law — even though the deportation planes landed in El Salvador after the judge had verbally ordered them to return. She questioned whether a verbal court order carries the same legal weight as a written one, a claim legal experts say is misleading. In urgent cases, verbal orders from judges are fully valid.

Legal Justification and Controversial Deportations

The Trump Administration claims it used a rarely-invoked law from 1798 — the Alien Enemies Act — to justify deporting the Venezuelan group. This law was originally designed to allow the government to deport foreign nationals from enemy countries during times of war. It’s almost never used today and has been criticized as outdated and prone to abuse.

In Dr. Alawieh’s case, the Department of Homeland Security claimed she admitted to supporting a leader of Hezbollah, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. Based on that, the government argued she should not be allowed into the country — even though she held a valid visa and was not facing any criminal charges.

The White House’s official account on social media posted a message saying “Bye-bye, Rasha” with a waving emoji — a move many saw as disrespectful and unprofessional, especially considering a federal judge had ordered her to remain in the U.S.

What’s at Stake

Legal scholars warn that if the courts do not act decisively to hold the executive accountable, the judiciary may lose its ability to serve as a check on presidential power. In a democracy, each branch of government is supposed to be equal — with courts ensuring that the President follows the law, not just his own will.

“If judges issue orders and the government simply ignores them, we’re in serious trouble,” says Professor Wehle. “That’s not just about immigration — it’s about democracy itself. When the President decides what the law means, and no one can stop him, that’s authoritarianism.”

She added, “The checks and balances are gone.”

Meanwhile, the Trump Administration is actively shaping the public narrative — using social media and television to present its defiance of the courts as tough leadership that protects the American people. But critics argue that the long-term damage to the Constitution and the rule of law could be severe.