The first case in the history of humankind

The End of Freedom Begins with a Misunderstanding – Kristi Noem, Donald Trump, and the Abuse of Habeas Corpus.

It is one of those sentences that make you choke on your laughter: "Habeas Corpus is a constitutional right that allows the president to remove people from this country." That wasn’t said by just anyone, but by Kristi Noem, the current Secretary of Homeland Security of the United States – in a hearing before the U.S. Senate on May 20, 2025. The sentence is not only factually wrong. It is a symptom. A symptom of a government that has embraced authoritarian tools and is openly attacking the foundations of the rule of law.

Habeas Corpus – the ancient protective right established in 17th-century England to prevent arbitrary detention – is not designed to remove people from a country. It is exactly the opposite. It guarantees every person – including migrants – the right to judicial review of their detention. It is the legal dividing line between a state governed by law and a police state. Between freedom – and Trump.

And yet Noem, backed by President Trump and his advisor Stephen Miller, is attempting to reinterpret this core principle. The justification: America is being overrun by an “invasion” – mainly by Venezuelan migrants. This phrasing is not analysis. It is rhetoric in the language of autocrats. If the country is “under attack,” then – so the logic goes – one is allowed to strike back. And suspend rights.

Trump is invoking the Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which allows habeas corpus to be suspended only “in cases of rebellion or invasion.” What was once meant for martial law is now being applied to people seeking protection. That is not only cynical. It is historically unprecedented. Never before has a democratically elected president abused habeas corpus for mass deportations.

How far can Trump go before someone stops him?

The abuse of habeas corpus is not an isolated case. It is a building block in a broader plan. Already in March, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members without trial. Even conservative courts in Texas, New York, and Pennsylvania opposed him. But Trump deported them anyway – overnight, on chartered flights to El Salvador. Despite court orders.

Now, the last remaining fundamental right is to be dismantled – the very right that the Supreme Court granted even to Guantanamo detainees in 2008: the right to judicial review of detention.

What does that say about a government that does not defend the rule of law, but redefines it?

What does that say about a cabinet that is willing to abandon the foundational structure of the U.S. Constitution to push political goals? What does that say about a society that allows this to happen?

The first case in the history of humankind

Never before – in any democracy in the world – has habeas corpus been used as a tool for deportation. Even dictatorships like Chile under Pinochet or Russia under Putin largely avoided the term, because its reversal would be too obvious. And yet now, a secretary of state sits in the U.S. Congress – in the birthplace of the liberal constitution – and claims this right is a permit to remove people.

That is grotesque.
That is an attack.
That is, if we are being honest, the first authoritarian reengineering of the American legal system from the inside – using a legal lie as its instrument.

Where is the resistance?

Senator Maggie Hassan immediately contradicted Noem, calling habeas corpus what it is: "The foundational right that separates free societies like ours from police states like North Korea." But it stops at words. No sanctions. No vote of no confidence. No legal consequences – so far.

Wie weit kann Trump noch gehen, ohne dass er gestoppt wird?
How far can Trump go without being stopped? How many constitutional principles must be broken, how many rights must be suspended before a majority in this country realizes that this is no longer just about immigration – but about the end of American democracy as we knew it?

If habeas corpus is no longer sacred, then nothing is safe.

Then the rule is: it is not the law that protects you, but the president who decides whether you still have rights.