President Donald Trump's administration came to consider one of the most controversial measures of his second term: suspending the right of habeas corpus for undocumented immigrants with the aim of accelerating mass deportations.

The revelation comes from an investigation published by The New York Times, which obtained a confidential memo prepared in April 2025 by Will Scharf, then White House staff secretary. The document warned of the legal and constitutional risks of limiting one of the oldest protections in the American judicial system.

Habeas corpus allows any detained person to demand before a judge that the Government legally justify their arrest. This is a fundamental guarantee against arbitrary detention and is protected by Article I of the United States Constitution.

According to the investigation, the proposal was promoted by Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff and main architect of Trump's immigration strategy. The idea arose at a time when the courts were beginning to stop some of the White House's most aggressive measures on immigration.

The debate that set off alarms in the White House

Scharf's memo reflects concerns among several officials about the limits of presidential power.

“The Constitution allows the suspension of habeas corpus only in cases of rebellion or invasion,” the lawyer wrote in the document sent to the chief of staff, Susie Wiles.

Scharf also recalled that historically the suspension of this right has only occurred in extreme situations, such as the Civil War or after the attack on Pearl Harbor, and that the courts have held that it is up to Congress to authorize such a measure.

“In practice, it prevents government agents from arbitrarily detaining, imprisoning or executing people,” the official said in one of the document's most forceful warnings.

According to the report, some members of the White House went so far as to describe the proposal privately as “crazy,” worried about the legal and political consequences it could trigger.

Pressure from the courts and mass deportations

The debate came as the administration faced growing judicial resistance to its immigration policies.

In April 2025, the Supreme Court allowed the Government to continue using the Enemy Aliens Act to deport certain Venezuelan immigrants, but also determined that detainees had the right to challenge their expulsions in court through habeas corpus writs.

That ruling slowed down part of the deportation strategy promoted by the White House and opened the door to thousands of federal lawsuits.

According to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University, between April 2025 and March 2026, more than 41,000 immigration-related lawsuits were filed, an unprecedented number.

An idea that did not prosper, but left warning signs

Ultimately, the proposal did not advance. However, The New York Times investigation reveals the extent to which some sectors of the administration explored extraordinary mechanisms to expand presidential authority and reduce court intervention in immigration matters.

Asked by the newspaper, Abigail Jackson, White House spokesperson, stated that it is common for officials to analyze different legal options to implement the presidential agenda and stressed that the final decision always corresponds to the president.

Although habeas corpus was not suspended, experts consider that the simple fact of having evaluated the measure represents an alarm signal about the limits of executive power and the future of the procedural rights of immigrants in the United States.