Fourth Circuit Rules Against Trump Administration in Alien Enemies Act Case
- Bias Rating
- Reliability
65% ReliableAverage
- Policy Leaning
42% Medium Right
- Politician Portrayal
-37% Negative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
-31% Negative
- Liberal
- Conservative
Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
---|---|---|
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan. |
Reliability Score Analysis
Policy Leaning Analysis
Politician Portrayal Analysis
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative

Contributing sentiments towards policy:
60% : As for "predatory incursion," text andhistory again show that the term "referred to a form of hostilities against the United States by another nation-state, a form of attack short of war.58% : J.G.G., 2025 WL 914682, at *10; see also J.A.V. v. Trump, --- F. Supp.
56% : On March 14, 2025, President Trump signed a Proclamation invoking his authority under the AEA to apprehend, detain, and remove "all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of [Tren de Aragua]" and who are not "naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States."
55% : 3d ---, 2025 WL 1257450, at *15-16 (S.D. Tex. May 1, 2025) (discussing historical records to support idea that "invasion" and "predatory incursion" refer to an attack by military forces); D.B.U. v. Trump, --- F.Supp. 3d ---, 2025 WL 1304288, at *6 (D. Col. 2025) (relying on "Founding-era definitions and historical sources" to conclude the same).
48% : Thus, I explain briefly why the President's invocation of the Act plainly violates its terms.
40% : Even worse, the government's argument in this case is that this plainly invalid invocation of the Act can be used to void any and all contractual obligations of the federal government.
20% : Four federal judges - three district judges and Judge Henderson of the DC Circuit - have previously ruled that Trump's invocation of the AEA is illegal because there is no declared war, and the activities of the Venezuelan drug gang Tren de Aragua (which Trump cites as justification for invoking AEA) are not an "invasion" or "predatory incursion."
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.