Trump v. J.G.G., 604 U.S. ___ (2025)
This primary source from Supreme Court of the United States supports 2 claims across 2 ledger entries.
All sources · Open original source
Claims supported by this source
- analysisdocumented
The rapid-removal design collided with the minimum requirement of notice and meaningful review recognized across the April opinions; later A.A.R.P. and J.G.G. proceedings left the proclamation's merits and remedy in active litigation as of July 27, 2026.
Per curiam pages 2-4 requiring notice and meaningful opportunity for habeas review; separate opinions distinguishedDue Process Under the Deportation Machine — Audit finding · Cited analysis
- factdocumented
In a 5–4 disposition vacating D.C. temporary orders on venue grounds, the Supreme Court majority and dissent agreed that covered detainees were entitled to notice and an opportunity for judicial review before removal.
Per curiam pages 2-4 requiring notice and meaningful opportunity for habeas review; separate opinions distinguishedDue Process Under the Deportation Machine — Outcome · Outcome