The Supreme Court has blocked, for now, the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under an 18th-century wartime law. The court’s brief order directed the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.” Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

Anti-Trump protesters rallied across the country over the weekend, decrying what they see as threats to the nation’s democratic ideals.

And Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer says “Pete Hegseth must be fired” after sources told The New York Times and The Associated Press that the defense secretary created another Signal messaging chat to share military air strike details.

The Latest:

Hegseth shared details of Yemen strike in a second Signal chat

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth created another Signal messaging chat that included his wife and brother where he shared similar details of a March military airstrike against Yemen’s Houthi militants that were sent in another chain with top Trump administration leaders, The New York Times reported.

A person familiar with the contents and those who received the messages, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, confirmed the second chat to The Associated Press.

The second chat on Signal — which is a commercially available app not authorized to be used to communicate sensitive or classified national defense information — included 13 people, the person said. They also confirmed the chat was dubbed “Defense ′ Team Huddle.”

The New York Times reported that the group included Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, who is a former Fox News producer, and his brother Phil Hegseth, who was hired at the Pentagon as a Department of Homeland Security liaison and senior adviser. Both have traveled with the defense secretary and attended high-level meetings.

▶ Read more about Hegseth’s reported second Signal chat

Alito’s dissent says court rushed to block Trump with middle-of-the night order

The Supreme Court acted “literally in the middle of the night” and without sufficient explanation, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a sharp dissent that castigated the seven-member majority.

Joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, Alito said there was “dubious factual support” for granting the request in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union. The group contended that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart such removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The majority did not provide a detailed explanation in the order early Saturday, as is typical, but the court previously said deportations could proceed only after those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

The justices’ brief order directed the administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Alito said that “unprecedented” relief was “hastily and prematurely granted.”

▶ Read more about Alito’s dissent

Supreme Court blocks, for now, new deportations under 18th-century wartime law

The Supreme Court on Saturday blocked, for now, the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under an 18th-century wartime law.

In a brief order, the court directed the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

The high court acted in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union contending that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The Supreme Court had said earlier in April that deportations could proceed only if those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

The Trump administration later Saturday filed paperwork urging the high court to reconsider its hold. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Saturday in a post on X: “We are confident we will ultimately prevail against the onslaught of meritless litigation brought by radical activists.”

▶ Read more about the court’s ruling