Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court’s 7-2 ruling on April 18, 2025, blocking President Donald Trump from deporting foreign nationals under the Alien Enemies Act has fueled misinformation, with some claiming Trump now faces arrest for contempt. The decision, which halted the removal of Venezuelan men accused of Tren de Aragua ties, mandates due process, but assertions that Trump could be “escorted in handcuffs” from the White House by U.S. Marshals are exaggerated and unsubstantiated.
The Court’s order, prompted by an ACLU emergency appeal, ensures deportees a “meaningful opportunity” to contest their removal, following reports of men being loaded onto buses in Texas despite prior judicial orders. This builds on the Court’s April 7 ruling, which allowed deportations but required due process. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented in the 7-2 decision—contrary to claims of a “unanimous” order. The ruling reinforces judicial oversight but does not directly initiate contempt proceedings against Trump.
Contempt would require a district court finding of willful defiance, as seen in U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s earlier probe, which was paused by the D.C. Circuit on April 18 after Boasberg found “probable cause” for contempt over prior deportations. Even if contempt were pursued, arresting a sitting president is legally fraught. The Justice Department’s long-standing position bars indicting a president in office, and Trump’s pardon power could further complicate enforcement, as with Joe Arpaio in 2017.
On X, reactions reveal deep division. Anti-Trump users like
@Kylesawyer celebrated the ruling as a “slap in the face,” while
@RpsAgainstTrump amplified arrest claims without evidence. Pro-Trump voices, such as
@NicoyaLuna, decried it as judicial overreach, lamenting Trump’s “lack of power.” The viral claim of imminent arrest, often shared with dramatic imagery, reflects partisan exaggeration rather than legal reality.
The ruling marks a significant setback for Trump’s immigration agenda, ensuring deportees can file habeas challenges, potentially delaying removals. It also raises questions about the fate of those already deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison, where conditions have drawn criticism. For now, the focus shifts to whether the administration complies with the Court’s mandate or faces further legal battles, rather than any immediate arrest of the president.