What Trump Can Learn from George W. Bush on Immigration Strategy
The White House should follow the Bush administration’s example and avoid antagonizing the Supreme Court.
With its order halting deportations to El Salvador at 1:00 a.m. on Saturday, the Supreme Court has intervened in the battle between the Trump administration and federal courts over immigration rights. As the justices examine whether the government can remove alleged Venezuelan terrorist gang members from American territory, they will revisit a series of cases stemming from the last major clash between a White House’s national security priorities and aliens’ alleged constitutional rights: the Bush administration’s decision to hold terrorists at Guantanamo Bay after 9/11.
As an official in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel at the time, I took part in the decisions that followed the core choice to treat the 9/11 attacks as acts of war rather than grandiose crimes. Like the Trump administration today, the Bush Justice Department adopted aggressive legal positions rooted in past wartime precedents—positions unfamiliar to most Americans, who had not seen a direct attack on U.S. soil since World War II. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the government's authority to adopt a wartime legal posture in response to 9/11 and the broader war on terrorism. But it also ruled that the Due Process Clause required meaningful distinctions in how the government treated citizens and non-citizens, depending on where U.S. forces encountered them.
Comparing 2001 with 2025 reveals stark differences that suggest today’s Court may reject key aspects of the Trump immigration agenda. If it learns the lessons of the Bush experience, the Trump administration can avoid a needless confrontation with the most conservative Supreme Court in a century. The Court’s conservative majority—in particular, Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—would support giving the president broad discretion to fight a real war, within the limits of the Constitution.
Politics
%20Richard%20Samuelson%20%20-%20Is%20American%20Nationalism%20Still%20Creed-able_-1.jpg)
Is American Nationalism Still Creed-able?
We are not there now, but there is reason to worry that the United States is in danger, if we are not careful, of ceasing to be a nation with the principles of 1776 at its core.
National Civitas Institute Poll: Americans are Anxious and Frustrated, Creating a Challenging Environment for Leaders
The poll reveals a deeply pessimistic American electorate, with a majority convinced the nation is on the wrong track.
.webp)
%20(1).avif)
.jpg)
Can Britain’s Next Prime Minister Escape the Net Zero Trap?
Britain has burned through five Prime Ministers and is paying some of the highest electricity prices in the world.
The Scanner at the Gate: Europe’s China Policy Litmus Test
China’s industrial policy is entering Europe through public procurement—and reshaping sensitive markets from within.
Confronting the New Antisemitism
"The postwar effort 'to rebrand Judaism as a religion' has made it impossible for American Jews to understand what they are facing today, because what we are facing today is an attack on the idea of Jewish peoplehood.”
“Democratic” Socialism Is Undemocratic
By promoting class hatred, suppressing private initiative, and seeking enhanced control of our lives, today’s democratic socialists undermine patriotism and individual initiative—two qualities that have long distinguished the United States from other major nations.
