The U.S. Supreme Court recently cleared major legal hurdles for President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration policies, notably allowing his administration to terminate protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants. However, the court also expressed concerns about due process and fair treatment for migrants facing deportation.
Since Trump’s return to the White House in January, the Supreme Court has intervened multiple times—seven emergency rulings so far—to uphold various aspects of his crackdown on immigration. Most recently, the court lifted injunctions blocking the end of “temporary protected status” and “humanitarian parole” for migrants from Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua, affecting over 800,000 people.
Despite these rulings favoring Trump’s agenda, the court pushed back on some administrative practices that fall short of constitutional due process guarantees. For example, the justices criticized the government for giving migrants only about 24 hours’ notice before deportation, without proper information on how to contest their removal. The court underscored that migrants, including those accused of gang ties, are entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard.
One notable case involved Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant wrongfully deported by the administration. The court ordered his release, but he has yet to be returned to the U.S., raising concerns about government compliance.
Experts observe that the Supreme Court is balancing deference to presidential authority in immigration with protection of fundamental legal rights. While the court has allowed Trump’s broad policies to proceed, it has also set limits on some of the administration’s most extreme measures.
Earlier rulings during Trump’s first term included upholding his 2017 travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority countries, and blocking his attempt to end protections for “Dreamers”—young migrants brought to the U.S. as children.
Other immigration cases remain pending, including challenges to Trump’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship and efforts to deport migrants to third countries, which raise serious due process questions.
Legal scholars predict that the court will continue to enforce due process protections for migrants, even as it broadly supports the administration’s authority to enforce immigration laws.