The Trump administration is actively considering the suspension of habeas corpus, the constitutional right that allows individuals to challenge unlawful detention in court. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller made the revelation on Friday, citing legal provisions that permit such a suspension during times of “rebellion or invasion.”
Speaking to reporters, Miller stated, “The Constitution is clear. There are circumstances under which habeas corpus can be suspended—and we are looking at all legal avenues to restore control of our borders and immigration system. A lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing.”
The remarks have sparked immediate legal and political backlash, raising alarm over the implications such a move would have on civil liberties, immigration law, and the separation of powers in the United States.
Mounting Legal Challenges
The potential move comes amid increasing legal scrutiny over the Trump administration’s handling of immigration detentions and deportations. In recent months, several federal judges have intervened in high-profile cases involving foreign students who were detained under questionable circumstances.
One such case involved a Turkish student, Rümeysa Öztürk, who was detained for six weeks after writing an article critical of Israel. A federal judge ordered her release, citing a habeas corpus petition that challenged the legality of her detention. In another case, a Columbia University student who publicly supported Palestinians was also released following a successful habeas corpus challenge.
Also Read: Pacgold Restarts Drilling at Alice River Gold Project
These legal decisions appear to have frustrated the administration, which has sought to fast-track deportations in line with President Trump’s campaign pledge to remove millions of undocumented immigrants.
Yet the administration has faced several setbacks. In March, a federal judge blocked an attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime-era law, to justify the deportation of over 200 Venezuelan nationals. Despite this, some deportation flights proceeded, further drawing judicial scrutiny.
Interpreting the Constitution
Miller’s interpretation of habeas corpus as a “privilege” rather than a right has drawn criticism from legal scholars and civil rights advocates. “Congress has the authority to suspend habeas corpus—not Stephen Miller, not the president,” said Marc Elias, an attorney affiliated with the Democratic Party, in an interview with MSNBC.
The U.S. Constitution allows for the suspension of habeas corpus, but only in cases of rebellion or invasion and explicitly grants this power to Congress, not the executive branch. Legal experts argue that expanding the definition of those terms to justify mass detentions of immigrants would be constitutionally unprecedented.
“This would be a massive overreach of executive authority and a violation of due process protections,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of Berkeley Law School. “Detaining people without judicial review is fundamentally incompatible with American democratic values.”
A Rare and Controversial Measure
In U.S. history, the suspension of habeas corpus has been extremely rare and has occurred only in moments of national crisis. President Abraham Lincoln suspended the right during the Civil War to suppress Confederate sympathizers. It was again suspended in Hawaii after the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, and once during U.S. governance of the Philippines in 1905. Additionally, it was used in parts of the South in the 19th century to combat violence from the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan.
These historical precedents involved wartime conditions or domestic insurrections—not immigration enforcement.
Trump’s Role and Political Calculations
While President Trump has not directly stated he would suspend habeas corpus, unnamed sources cited by CNN report that he has been personally involved in internal discussions. In a speech in April, Trump hinted at taking “very strong” actions to overcome legal obstacles, saying, “There’s one way that’s been used by three very highly respected presidents, but we hope we don’t have to go that route.”
The statement is widely believed to refer to the rare use of habeas suspension by past presidents. Critics fear that if invoked now, it could open the floodgates for broad executive authority unchecked by judicial oversight.
Immigrant advocacy groups have condemned the idea. “This is not about national security or public safety—it’s about silencing dissent and fast-tracking deportations without legal recourse,” said Aisha Mahmood, spokesperson for Justice for Immigrants, a nonprofit legal group.
A Looming Constitutional Battle
As Trump’s deportation agenda intensifies, the prospect of suspending habeas corpus sets the stage for a major constitutional confrontation. With several cases already pending in federal courts and growing resistance from legal and civil society groups, any attempt to restrict judicial oversight of detentions is expected to be fiercely contested.
For now, the Trump administration’s intentions remain under scrutiny, but the mere suggestion of revoking a centuries-old legal safeguard has reignited fears about executive overreach and the erosion of civil liberties in modern America.
