10
Loading video...
By Dan Gooding
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Senators grilled Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem Tuesday on her understanding of habeas corpus, and her answers prompted criticism that she was not fully acquainted with a right outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
During a budget hearing at the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, Democratic New Hampshire Senator Margaret Hassan asked Noem what habeas corpus was.
"Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country," Noem responded.
Read More on Politics
Hassan replied: "Excuse me, that's incorrect."
Habeas corpus is the right to challenge unlawful detention.
"While Secretary Noem displayed an alarming naiveté regarding the history and meaning of habeas corpus, known as the Great Writ, the NACDL remains clear-eyed on how this fundamental right serves as an indispensable shield against arbitrary detention and unchecked state power," National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) President Christopher A. Wellborn told Newsweek in a statement.
...
Why It Matters
The writ of habeas corpus has been at the center of a debate around the deportation of alleged illegal immigrants, with the Trump administration accused of bypassing the right to speed up some removals. President Donald Trump's senior policy advisor, Stephen Miller, said earlier this month that the administration was looking to suspend the right.
What To Know
Hassan was forced to correct Noem, prompting a reaction on social media. Some were concerned that the Homeland Security secretary would not know the definition of an article that has been the focus of immigration policy debate in recent months.
"This is extraordinary. The Secretary of Homeland Security doesn't know what the right of habeas corpus is (the ancient right to go to court to challenge government detention) and offers an incoherent definition which suggests she thinks it's a presidential power to deport people?" Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, posted on X, formerly Twitter.
Others said the secretary's answer was embarrassing and a sign of wider issues within the administration, which is trying to deliver on the promise of mass deportations of illegal immigrants.
Later in the hearing, Democratic New Jersey Senator Andy Kim returned to the issue, asking Noem to confirm that she understood that any suspension of the writ had to be authorized by Congress, not the president.
Noem replied with the example of President Abraham Lincoln, who was given retroactive permission by lawmakers. Hassan had provided that example minutes earlier.
"I believe any president that was able to do that I the past, it should be afforded to our current day president," Noem said. "This president has never said he is going to do this. He has never communicated to me or his administration that they are going to consider suspending habeas corpus, but I do think the Constitution allows them the right to consider it."
Kim then asked how many times habeas corpus had been suspended. Noem said once, but it had been suspended four times. She also could not answer where in the Constitution the writ was outlined.
What People Are Saying
Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, in a statement to Newsweek: "It would be hard to believe a government official, even among these rogues, could be genuinely ignorant of the purpose of habeas - which, for 600 years, has been to check executive conduct, not to license authoritarians. So, we can assume this is a chintzy Orwellian play to make 2+2=5. They don't deserve the Constitution they are trying to destroy, obviously, so they seek to rebrand it in their own authoritarian vision. Don't fall for it or let it happen."
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Newsweek in a statement: "Secretary Noem was right: Presidents have suspended habeas corpus in practice—Lincoln, Grant, FDR, and Bush—all during moments of crisis. Technically, Congress holds that power under the Constitution, but in reality, presidents have acted first, and legal authority followed. The precedent is real."
NACDL President Christopher A. Wellborn, in a statement to Newsweek: "This incident, another example from high-ranking members of this administration, underscores the need to communicate to the public that those in power sometimes lack even the most fundamental understanding of our Constitution's basic tenets. Our commitment to defending liberty must remain unwavering, especially when such foundational principles are so blatantly misunderstood."
Pod Save America host Jon Favreau, resharing the video of Noem on X, formerly Twitter: "A fully cooked propaganda brain."
Immigration attorney Lindsay Toczylowski, who has worked on cases challenging the Alien Enemies Act, on X: "This response would be embarrassing if given by a student in a first year law school class. It is horrific that this response comes from someone with multiple active lawsuits against her Department involving the right of habeas corpus and their unlawful detention practices."
First Amendment attorney Alex Morey, sharing screenshots of a Reuters article from May 14, on X: "Noem knows the definition of habeas corpus. See e.g. this from just last week. Impressively quick jump to making a false statement to Congress."
What Happens Next
Habeas corpus remains in effect, and various cases challenging the potential bypassing of this process are pending in the courts.
Update 5/20/25, 3:15 p.m. ET: This story was updated with additional comments.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines