I haven’t seen any polls on this topic, but my guess is that only the most “progressive” of voters are against sending these gang members back home.
For the most part, the MSM articles I found label this action of the Trump administration as the president’s defiance of a court order or ignoring of a court order; for example: ABC headline “Trump administration ignores judge’s order to turn deportation planes around”; the BBC headline “US deports hundreds of Venezuelans despite court order.” However, it appears that Trump neither ignored nor defied a court order; he and his lawyers anticipated it, finessed it, and responded to it as well. Like the deportation or hate it, it came before the court order and is a deliberate test of whether a president has this power, as well as whether a federal judge has the power to block it at all.
Axios (surprisingly) has what I consider a somewhat (not entirely) decent and relatively succinct summary of events. A few excerpts:
The Trump administration says it ignored a Saturday court order to turn around two planeloads of alleged Venezuelan gang members because the flights were over international waters and therefore the ruling didn’t apply, two senior officials tell Axios. …
The White House welcomes that fight. “This is headed to the Supreme Court. And we’re going to win,” a senior White House official told Axios. …
Trump’s advisers contend U.S. District Judge James Boasberg overstepped his authority by issuing an order that blocked the president from deporting about 250 alleged Tren de Aragua gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1789.
The war-time law gives the executive extreme immense power to deport noncitizens without a judicial hearing. But it has been little-used, particularly in peacetime.
“It’s the [legal] showdown that was always going to happen between the two branches of government,” a senior White House official said. …
They didn’t actually set out to defy a court order. “We wanted them on the ground first, before a judge could get the case, but this is how it worked out,” said the official.
I’ve read many articles about the judge’s ruling, and I have yet to find one that states clearly what his legal basis was for issuing it. I assume, however, it was the idea that the deportees were not afforded due process. Here the NY Post comes close to saying that:
The temporary ruling will put a 14-day restraining order on use of the wartime act, which the Trump administration hopes to use to deport any migrant it identifies as a gang member without following normal criminal and immigration channels. …
Boasberg’s ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and Democracy Forward challenging the removal of five Venezuelan men under the centuries-old law — which was reportedly signed on Friday. …
The Alien Enemies Act has only been used three times before in American history, all during wartime. …
Trump’s proclamation’s language, however, contends the gang is effectively at war with the United States and Venezuelan nationals are now “liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as Alien Enemies.” …
Trump signed a presidential order in January, designating Tren de Aragua a foreign terrorist organization, clearing a path for immigration officials to start rounding up its members for removal.
I assume another of the questions for the court is whether the act is limited to wartime in the “formal declaration of war” sense, and also the aforementioned issue of whether a mere District Court judge can call a halt to such a deportation action by a duly elected president.
The left is in outrage and shouting “constitutional crisis,” but the Constitution is not being challenged, just the power of this judge, the interpretation of the Act, and the timing of the order in relation to the location of the gang members at the time. At least, that’s the way it seems to me.