Are We Invaders?
Trump's exploration of a suspension of habeas corpus is a strike to immigration and rule of law.
When my parents came to this country, it was obvious they hadn’t been born here. They spoke with accents, sometimes wore traditional clothing, and were unfamiliar with American customs. If your parents were immigrants too, you may relate to this. This country has alw
ays been one of immigrants—and it still is. But ask yourself: if the current Republican leadership had seen your parents when they first arrived, what would they have thought? Today, it’s clear—they would have labeled them as invaders. And that label now comes at a dangerous cost to our democracy and rule of law.
Trump’s top adviser Stephen Miller recently stated that the administration is actively exploring legal justifications to suspend habeas corpus in order to carry out deportations more aggressively. If you’re not familiar with legal jargon, that might sound abstract. But for anyone studying or practicing law, it’s chilling. Habeas corpus is the constitutional right that protects people from unlawful imprisonment—it ensures you can challenge your arrest in court. Without it, the government could arrest you, label you undocumented, and deny you your day in court. Trump continues to reveal his dictator tendencies.
How is this being justified? The Constitution allows suspension of habeas corpus only “in cases of rebellion or invasion.” And so, Republican rhetoric has turned undocumented immigrants into a supposed “invasion.” They say cities like New York, Chicago, and San Francisco have been overrun by migrants. But visit these cities. You’ll find that immigrants are the lifeblood of their economies, their cultures, their very functioning. They bring vitality, labor, and yes—flavor—to the American experience. There may be real immigration policy issues to solve, but there is no “invasion.” The only one we’ve seen recently was the violent storming of the U.S. Capitol by white nationalists.
So if we rewind to the 1990s, when my parents first walked the streets of New York City, while Trump was being sued for housing discrimination and exploiting tenants, it’s clear how he would have seen them—not as dreamers or contributors, but as threats. As invaders.
And that should scare all of us—not just immigrants. Habeas corpus, Latin for “you shall have the body,” is enshrined in Article I of the Constitution, which outlines the powers of Congress and notably not the President. This makes the idea of a unilateral executive suspension all the more dangerous. It’s not just an immigration issue; it’s a constitutional crisis.
Courts, across ideologies, have fiercely defended habeas corpus. Yet Trump has shown open disdain for judicial independence. Judges appointed by both Democrats and Republicans, including some chosen by Trump himself, are warning about due process erosion. Trump throws around words like “terrorist” and “gang member” to justify mass deportations—even when there’s no evidence. If he saw my parents in traditional Indian clothing when they first arrived, would he have labeled them “terrorists” too?
Even more disturbing is the complicity of some within our own communities. Kash Patel, a senior Trump aide of Gujarati Indian descent, recently told senators he didn’t know whether due process applied to Venezuelans deported to El Salvador. Trump himself admitted he wasn’t sure whether the Constitution required him to provide due process to non-citizens. Judges across ideology are telling him it does.
If non-citizens can be denied due process, how long before it’s denied to citizens as well—especially those who look or sound “foreign”? If we accept this erosion of rights, we are all at risk. Take action. Join SAATH today.