U.S. Judge Orders Government to Help Venezuelans Deported to El Salvador Return for Legal Process | Latest Update

A federal judge has ruled that the U.S. government must facilitate and pay for the return of Venezuelan migrants who were deported to El Salvador’s infamous CECOT prison last year after being removed under an 18th-century law, marking a major move on due process and immigration rights.

Here’s the latest on the court order, what it means for deported migrants, and what comes next.

What the Court Ordered: Key Points

In a decision this week, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the Trump administration must help Venezuelan migrants who were unlawfully deported return to the United States if they want to pursue legal challenges against their removal.

Judge Boasberg’s order focuses on migrants who are now in third countries after leaving custody in El Salvador, while he stopped short of forcing returns from Venezuela itself due to sensitive foreign relations issues.

The ruling reflects the judge’s finding that the migrants were denied constitutional due process protections when they were deported and that the government should remedy this violation.

Background: What Happened to the Venezuelans

In March 2025, the U.S. deported several hundred Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) under the century-old Alien Enemies Act, claiming the migrants were linked to a Venezuelan gang.

Although a judge previously blocked the deportations, the government proceeded with the flights, arguing that the migrants had already left U.S. territory.

Around that time, many deportees were later released from CECOT and sent back to Venezuela through a prisoner swap.

Court Ruling Breakdown

The judge’s decision includes several important elements:

Table reflects judge’s latest directive and government obligations.

What This Means for the Migrants

• Eligible Venezuelans now abroad can return to the U.S. to pursue legal proceedings against their deportations.
• The government must fund and facilitate travel for those who want to come back.
• Returnees can be detained under immigration custody while their cases are heard, and could face re-deportation if removed again.
• Migrants may also be able to challenge their deportation status from abroad using legal filings like habeas petitions.

Judge Boasberg stressed that these migrants were previously denied due process and that the government has a duty to correct that violation.

Ongoing Legal and Political Context

The case stems from a controversial use of the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely used law from the late 18th century that allows deportations during wartime. Many legal experts have argued that its use in this context – for alleged gang affiliation in peacetime – exceeded constitutional limits.

The government has pushed back, saying it will appeal court orders and defend its rationale for the deportations, setting up ongoing legal battles.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1: Who does the judge’s order apply to?
A: Migrants deported to El Salvador who are now in other countries and want to return to the U.S. to pursue legal challenges.

Q2: Are migrants in Venezuela included?
A: Not yet. The government must report on whether it’s feasible to bring them back.

Q3: Will the government pay for their return?
A: Yes – the ruling requires covering travel costs for those who desire to return.

Q4: Can returnees be detained?
A: Yes, they may be taken into immigration custody during legal proceedings.

Q5: Why is this case significant?
A: It highlights due process protections in U.S. immigration law and limits on deportation authority under historic statutes.

What’s Next?

• The government must file a status report by March 13 outlining its travel plan for eligible Venezuelans.
• Legal challenges and appeals are expected as the administration defends its actions and due process issues continue.
• How and whether migrants can contest their deportations or gang designations will likely continue through the courts.

This ruling underscores ongoing debates in U.S. immigration policy over due process rights, executive authority, and the legality of deportations.