Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s surprise dissent in a major immigration case has ignited fury among MAGA supporters who once championed her appointment to the Supreme Court.
Key Insights
- Justice Barrett joined the three liberal justices in a 5-4 decision regarding the Trump administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act for deportations.
- Despite allowing deportations to proceed, the Court mandated that individuals must have the opportunity to challenge their removal under due process principles.
- Barrett’s dissent has provoked severe backlash from Trump supporters and conservative commentators who view her vote as a betrayal.
- This case highlights growing tensions within conservative legal circles about priorities between executive power and constitutional protections.
- Barrett has previously sided with liberal justices on other key issues despite voting with conservative justices over 80% of the time in 2023.
Supreme Court’s Split Decision on Deportation Authority
The Supreme Court recently ruled in a narrow 5-4 decision to allow the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 for deportations to continue, though with significant limitations. The ruling requires that individuals targeted under the Act must have opportunities to challenge their removal through court hearings, preserving some due process protections. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, broke with her conservative colleagues to join Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Brown Jackson in dissent, creating an unexpected ideological alignment that has stunned many political observers.
The majority opinion allows deportations to proceed while legal challenges continue, but mandates judicial review for those facing removal. The case specifically involves the administration’s efforts to deport individuals allegedly associated with criminal gangs, particularly those claimed to be members of Tren de Aragua. While the administration hailed the decision as a victory, the required judicial oversight represents a significant limitation on executive power that Justice Sotomayor acknowledged as a positive development even in her dissent.
Conservative Backlash Against Barrett
Barrett’s dissent has unleashed a torrent of criticism from conservative commentators and Trump supporters who previously championed her appointment. Conservative influencer Rogan O’Handley stated, “While this Supreme Court victory for Trump allowing him to deport cartels is huge, it was only a 5-4 decision. Guess who joined the 3 liberal Justices to keep cartels here in America? Amy Coney Barrett.”
Amy Coney Barrett, once a conservative darling, is now officially a swamp creature. Her mask is off, showing her true colors on the bench. She sided with the 3 liberal justices when it came to deportations under the Alien Enemies Act… Trump needs to distance himself from the… pic.twitter.com/OevlI79g8O
— The 🐰🕳️ (@TheHoleTweet) April 8, 2025
Some critics have resorted to gender-based attacks, with Jeff Younger saying, “All the men on the Court voted the law. All the women, including Amy Coney Barrett, voted their feelings.” Such comments reflect the growing divide within conservative circles about Barrett’s judicial philosophy and loyalty to the movement. Conservative commentator Mark Levin accused Barrett of having “deceived people into thinking she was a reliable constitutionalist.”
Barrett’s Judicial Independence
Despite the criticism, Barrett’s judicial record reflects more complexity than her detractors suggest. While she has voted with the court’s most conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, over 80% of the time in 2023, she has occasionally demonstrated independence from partisan expectations. Her dissent in this case emphasized procedural concerns, joining Justice Sotomayor in questioning the administration’s attempt to “rush plaintiffs out of the country before a court could decide whether the President’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act was lawful.”
Barrett specifically criticized the court’s conservative majority for taking the case on an emergency basis without allowing normal federal appeal processes to unfold. This stance aligns with her previous expressions of concern about judicial overreach and the importance of procedural safeguards. While the American Civil Liberties Union viewed the ruling as a partial victory for due process rights, President Trump characterized it as “a great day for justice in America.”
Looking Ahead
The case will now return to the district court in Washington, DC, where further proceedings will determine the fate of individuals targeted under the Alien Enemies Act. While the Supreme Court’s decision strengthens the government’s position on using the historic law, the required judicial review represents a significant constraint on executive authority in immigration matters. Barrett’s unexpected dissent signals potentially deepening fault lines within the conservative legal movement about the balance between national security concerns and constitutional protections.
For conservatives who celebrated Barrett’s appointment and her vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, her independence on this case has prompted soul-searching about judicial nominations and expectations of loyalty. The ruling demonstrates that Supreme Court justices, even those appointed with strong ideological expectations, often develop judicial philosophies that transcend partisan divisions in ways that frustrate their political backers.
Sources:
- Amy Coney Barrett Siding Against Trump Sparks MAGA Fury: ‘Disgusting Fraud’
- ‘She is evil’: Amy Coney Barrett under attack by right wing after USAid ruling
- Why Amy Coney Barrett Sided With Liberals on Deportation Case
