The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence Who we are Books Volokh Daily Email Archives Search DMCA RSS

Politics

Plaintiffs Contesting Tren de Aragua Membership Claims / Alien Enemies Act Application Still Can't Sue Pseudonymously

Eugene Volokh | 11.9.2026 8:01 AM

From Judge James Wesley Hendrix (N.D. Tex.) Friday in W.M.M. v. Trump (for more on the earlier Fifth Circuit en banc decision, see here):

On March 14, 2025, the President invoked the Alien Enemies Act—a federal statute that permits the President to deport foreign nationals who are engaged in an "invasion or predatory incursion" against the United States—to detain and remove members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan terrorist group that traffics drugs and engages in other criminal activity. The petitioners, on behalf of a proposed class of Venezuelan nationals detained under the President's Proclamation, brought a habeas action in this Court. The petitioners argue that (1) the Proclamation exceeds the President's authority under the Alien Enemies Act and (2) the detainees have not received sufficient notice to challenge their removal.

After trips to the Fifth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, the matter is back before this Court…. [T]he petitioners seek leave for the proposed class representatives to proceed under pseudonyms. The Court denies that motion because the named petitioners have not substantiated their conclusory allegations with evidence that they will suffer harm if their identities are disclosed. The Fifth Circuit found the petitioners' allegations insufficient to support their request to use pseudonyms [though it] {denied the petitioners' motion "without prejudice to any future determination by the district court regarding whether to allow any new class representatives to proceed under pseudonyms"}, and the petitioners have not persuaded this Court to depart from the Fifth Circuit's sound analysis….

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) "require[s] plaintiffs to disclose their names in the instrument they file to commence a lawsuit." "Public access to this information is more than a customary procedural formality; First Amendment guarantees are implicated when a court decides to restrict public scrutiny of judicial proceedings." … "Judicial records belong to the American people; they are public, not private, documents." … The Fifth Circuit thus recognizes a "strong presumption against party pseudonymity."

In certain circumstances, however, courts may allow parties to proceed under pseudonyms. Specifically, where a case involves "matters of a sensitive and highly personal nature," the usual practice of disclosing the parties'........

© Reason.com