The U.S. Supreme Court has dealt a fresh blow to the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration agenda, blocking the swift deportation of a group of Venezuelan detainees held in a North Texas facility. The court’s decision marks another setback in the administration’s push to accelerate removals of undocumented immigrants.

In a ruling issued Friday, the justices sided with attorneys for a group of Venezuelan men accused by immigration authorities of gang affiliation — a classification the administration argues makes them eligible for expedited removal under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The court emphasized that individuals must be granted the opportunity to contest their deportation, though it did not address the broader legality of invoking the centuries-old law in the case.

The Supreme Court had previously issued a temporary stay on the deportations last month, citing concerns that removals were imminent. This latest ruling reinforces the requirement for due process in immigration proceedings, a principle Trump and his allies have often criticized as a barrier to swift enforcement.

In response to the decision, former President Donald Trump expressed his frustration on Truth Social, writing, “THE SUPREME COURT WON’T ALLOW US TO GET CRIMINALS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!”

At the same time, the Department of Homeland Security has made an unprecedented request for 20,000 National Guard troops to assist in immigration enforcement efforts nationwide. A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed the Pentagon is reviewing the request, which would involve deploying state-based Guard units to support deportation operations beyond the southern border.

According to DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin, the move is part of Trump’s mandate “to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens.” Unlike previous deployments focused on the U.S.-Mexico border, these troops would operate across the interior of the country, raising questions about federal overreach and state authority.

Currently, around 10,000 troops are stationed along the border, where they provide logistical support, surveillance, and limited law enforcement assistance. While some have begun accompanying border agents in the newly militarized zones, direct detention of migrants remains the responsibility of immigration authorities.

The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the legal and political complexities surrounding Trump’s immigration crackdown, as courts, civil liberties groups, and local governments continue to push back against sweeping federal enforcement strategies.

Sanctions imposed by former U.S. President Donald Trump on the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its senior officials have severely disrupted the tribunal’s ability to function, staff members say, complicating its mission to investigate and prosecute war crimes around the world.

The sweeping measures, issued via executive order in February, were introduced in response to the ICC’s controversial arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, announced in late 2024. The sanctions specifically targeted ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, barring him from entering the United States and freezing his personal assets.

ICC officials now report that the sanctions have gone beyond symbolic gestures, severely limiting their operational capabilities. Staff say basic tasks have become “near impossible,” with work across various investigations — including ongoing probes in Sudan and Ukraine — now effectively stalled.

The court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, has reportedly lost access to essential services, including his official Microsoft email account. Additionally, several of his personal bank accounts in the United Kingdom have been blocked. The U.S. order threatens fines and prison time for individuals or institutions providing Khan with any financial, material, or technological support. American nationals working for the court have also been warned they may face arrest if they return to the U.S.

The investigation into war crimes in Sudan, including charges of genocide against former President Omar al-Bashir, has also been paused. The prosecutor overseeing the case, Eric Iverson, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. seeking legal protection from the sanctions. His attorney, Allison Miller, said the restrictions have made it impossible for him to perform “basic lawyer functions.”

Three lawsuits have been filed in U.S. courts by ICC-affiliated staff and consultants, arguing the sanctions infringe upon their constitutional rights, including freedom of expression.

The ICC’s challenges have been compounded by a separate scandal involving allegations of sexual misconduct against Khan himself. A Wall Street Journal report revealed accusations from a Malaysian staffer who alleged coercion and sexual assault across several ICC missions. Khan’s legal team has denied all claims, calling them “categorically untrue.”

Further scrutiny has followed, with allegations that Khan retaliated against staff members who supported the accuser. An internal UN oversight investigation into the claims is reportedly underway, with findings expected in the coming months.

As the ICC faces mounting external and internal pressures, its future credibility and capacity to pursue international justice may hang in the balance.

Tensions between France and Algeria have escalated further this week, as both nations continue a tit-for-tat expulsion of diplomats in a worsening diplomatic standoff.

France announced on Wednesday that it will expel an unspecified number of Algerian diplomats in direct response to Algeria’s decision to remove 15 French officials from the country over the weekend. This follows an earlier episode in mid-April, when Algeria expelled 12 French diplomatic personnel, prompting France to retaliate by expelling an equal number of Algerian officials and recalling its ambassador from Algiers.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot confirmed the latest move during an interview with BFM TV, stating that Algerian officials holding diplomatic passports but lacking valid visas to operate in France would be required to leave. He declined to specify the exact number of expulsions, saying, “It’s not so much a question of numbers, it’s a question of quality. Algeria wanted to send back our agents — we’re sending back theirs.”

On Tuesday, the French Foreign Ministry summoned Algeria’s chargé d’affaires to formally notify him of the decision. The diplomatic escalation came just two days after Algeria had informed France’s chargé d’affaires in Algiers that 15 French civil servants on temporary assignments would be expelled.

While Algeria’s Foreign Ministry has yet to release an official statement, the state-run Algerian Press Agency (APS) reported that the expelled French personnel were appointed under what it described as “irregular conditions.”

France responded with a sharply worded statement accusing Algeria of breaching a 2013 bilateral agreement, which governs the movement and duties of officials holding diplomatic, official, or service passports. The statement condemned Algeria’s “new conditions of access” for French officials and described the expulsion as unjustified.

Barrot characterized Algeria’s action as “incomprehensible and brutal,” and insisted that France’s response was “immediate, firm, and proportionate.” He added that further measures could be taken depending on the evolution of the situation.

The dispute adds to a growing list of irritants in Franco-Algerian relations. Key points of contention include Algeria’s refusal to repatriate nationals facing deportation from France and the continued detention of dissident Franco-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal.

Relations took a significant downturn in July 2024, when France expressed support for Morocco’s claim to Western Sahara — a move that angered Algiers, a staunch supporter of Sahrawi self-determination.

Although French President Emmanuel Macron and Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune shared a reportedly positive phone conversation in early April, hopes of a diplomatic thaw appear to have been short-lived.