WAHINGTON: The US Supreme Court swept away this week another obstacle to one of President Donald Trump`s most aggressively pursued policies mass deportation again showing its willingness to back his hardline approach to immigration.

The justices, though, have signalled some reservations with how he is carrying it out. Since Trump returned to the White House in January, the court already has been called upon to intervene on an emergency basis in seven legal fights over his crackdown on immigration.

It most recently let Trump`s administration end temporary legal status provided to hundreds of thousands of migrants for humanitarian reasons by his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden while legal challenges in two cases play out in lower courts.

The Supreme Court on Friday lifted a judge`s order that had halted the revocation of immigration `parole` for more than 500,000 Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants. On May 19, it lifted another judge`s order preventing the termination of `temporary protected status` for more than 300,000 Venezuelan migrants.

In some other cases, however, the justices have ruled that the administration must treat migrants fairly, as required under the US Constitution`s guarantee of due process.

`This president has been more aggressive than any in modern US history to quickly remove non-citizens from the country,` said Kevin Johnson, an immigration and public interest law expert at the University of California, Davis.

No president in modern history `has been as willing to deport non-citizens without due process, Johnson added.

That dynamic has forced the Supreme Court to police the contours of the administration`s actions, if less so the legality of Trump`s underlying policies. The court`s 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices appointed by Trump during his first term as president.

`President Trump is acting within his lawful authority to deport illegal aliens and protect the American people. While the Supreme Court has rightfully acknowledged the president`s authority in some cases, in others they have invented new due process rights for illegal aliens that will make America less safe. We are confident in the legality of our actions and will continue fighting to keep President Trump`s promises,` White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told Reuters.

The justices twice on April 7 and on May 16 have placed limits on the administration`s attempt to implement Trump`s invocation of a 1798 law called the Alien Enemies Act, which historically has been employed only in wartime, to swiftly deport Venezuelan migrants who it has accused of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang.

Lawyers and family members of some of the migrants have disputed the gang membership allegation. On May 16, the justices also said a bid by the administration to deport migrants from a detention centre in Texas failed basic constitutional requirements. Giving migrants `notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does notpass muster,` the court stated.

Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse actions.

The court has not outright barred the administration from pursuing these deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, as the justices have yet to decide the legality of using the law for this purpose.

The US government last invoked the Alien Enemies Act during World War Two to intern and deport people of Japanese, German and Italian descent.

`The Supreme Court has in several cases reaffirmed some basic principles of constitutional law (including that) the due process clause applies to all people on US soil,` said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School`s immigrants` rights clinic.

Even for alleged gang members, Mukherjee said, the court `has been extremely clear that they are entitled to notice before they can be summarily deported from the United States.

A wrongly deported man In a separate case, the court on April 10 ordered the administration to facilitate the release from custody in El Salvador of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant who was living in Maryland. The administration has acknowledged that Abrego Garcia was wrongly deported to El Salvador.

The administration has yet to return Abrego Garcia to the United States, which according to some critics amounts to defiance of the Supreme Court.-Reuters