5th Circuit dismisses bid to block Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act in case tied to alleged Tren de Aragua members

A federal appeals court has dismissed a challenge to President Donald Trump’s administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely invoked 18th-century-era deportation authority, in litigation tied to alleged members of the Venezuelan criminal group Tren de Aragua. The dispute reached the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which dismissed the case after all plaintiffs named in the challenge were deported, according to a Fox News report published August 14, 2026.

The Alien Enemies Act, enacted in 1798, has historically been used only in extraordinary circumstances and is invoked by the executive branch to authorize actions against non-citizens deemed to be connected to hostile enemies during a declared period of conflict. In this litigation, plaintiffs argued that the government’s reliance on that authority was unlawful as applied to the removal actions at issue, Fox News reported.

The 5th Circuit’s decision turned on the posture of the case rather than on a full merits ruling described in the Fox report. With the plaintiffs deported, the court dismissed the challenge, leaving the lower-court record and the administration’s use of the statute intact for the time being, according to the reporting.

The case is part of a broader legal and policy fight over the scope of executive authority to conduct immigration enforcement and removals, including when the government cites older statutes that are not routinely used. In this instance, the litigation centered on whether the executive branch could proceed under the Alien Enemies Act in a context involving alleged Tren de Aragua members, a claim described by the reporting as connected to public-safety and national-security concerns.

The Fox News report described the latest “court clash” as the continuing effect of the government’s strategy to use the Alien Enemies Act in enforcement against individuals it alleges are linked to the group. Because the 5th Circuit dismissed the challenge after the plaintiffs were deported, the decision may limit what courts can review in that particular lawsuit, depending on whether future plaintiffs can establish live standing or other procedural requirements.

The practical effect for immigration enforcement is that, at least within the procedural timeline of this specific case, the administration’s ability to rely on the Alien Enemies Act is not curtailed by the appellate dismissal. Attorneys for the plaintiffs and the administration may still have additional avenues depending on the case history below, including whether any remaining plaintiffs are still in the United States or whether related actions can be contested through other procedural mechanisms.

As additional litigation develops, courts will likely continue grappling with questions about the Alien Enemies Act’s reach, the circumstances under which the executive branch may invoke it, and what forms of relief plaintiffs can seek when removals occur during the course of litigation. The Fox report indicated the 5th Circuit dismissal was tied to the deportations of the plaintiffs, shaping the next phase of what can be litigated and by whom.