The Supreme Court on Monday removed a temporary block on the Trump administration’s use of a controversial wartime authority to deport alleged members of a Venezuelan gang, ruling the five immigants who challenged the policy did so in the wrong court.

“The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia,” the justices wrote of the challenge in U.S. District Court in D.C. “As a result, the Government is likely to succeed on the merits of this action.”

The 5-4 ruling did not touch on the underlying legal questions of the challenge. It leaves open the possibility the migrants could refile their case in Texas or other jurisdictions where they are detained. But for now, it opens the door for the Trump administration to deport more Venezuelan migrants under the act, although it also said the government must give prospective deportees notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal.

And it appears to take the central legal issues of the case away from U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg, whose temporary restraining order blocking the deportations prompted impeachment calls from Trump and his allies.

The court’s three liberal justices dissented, joined in part by Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The liberals warned of potential “life or death consequences” from the majority’s order and criticized their colleagues, saying their ruling “flouts well-established limits … creates new law on the emergency docket, and elides the serious threat our intervention poses to the lives of individual detainees.”

President Donald Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act, which is aimed at removing citizens of a nation with which the United States is at war, after declaring the presence of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang in the United States an “invasion.”

Government attorneys said Boasberg’s block on such deportations while litigation continues was an unconstitutional imposition on the president’s broad authority to deal with national security issues and conduct foreign policy. They claimed the gang is operating in the United States at the behest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, an idea disputed by government intelligence agencies.

“This case presents fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national-security-related operations in this country—the President…or the Judiciary,” acting solicitor general Sarah M. Harris wrote in court filings. “The Constitution supplies a clear answer: the President. The republic cannot afford a different choice.”

Boasberg halted the deportations temporarily in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of five migrants. The organization says Trump can’t invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelans because the United States is not at war with the country. It called the president’s use of the act “unprecedented.”

“The act was meant solely to address ‘military’ hostilities directed at the United States, not criminal activity by a gang during peacetime,” ACLU attorneys wrote in a filing.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem celebrated the Supreme Court’s ruling on in a social media post. “President Trump was proven RIGHT once again! SCOTUS confirms our Commander-in-Chief Donald J. Trump has the power to stop the invasion of our country by terrorists using war time powers. LEAVE NOW or we will arrest you, lock you up and deport you,” she wrote.

The ACLU called the justices’ ruling that migrants are entitled to challenge the government’s claim that they are gang members “a huge victory.”

“We are disappointed that we will need to start the court process over again in a different venue but the critical point is that the Supreme Court said individuals must be given due process to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act,” lead ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt said in a statement.

The act has been invoked three other times in the nation’s history and only during wartime — including World War II, when it was used to hold tens of thousands of people, including U.S. citizens, of Japanese descent.

A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld Boasberg’s injunction 2-1, emphasizing that it was a temporary decision and not the final word on the legality of Trump’s use of the act.

Boasberg called the Trump administration’s use of the act “problematic and concerning.”

He also has questioned whether Trump officials purposely defied his March 15 order blocking deportations under the act, when he told the government it should return any planes already carrying deportees from the United States.

Trump officials have since said more than 130 Venezuelans who were being deported under the act were beyond U.S. airspace at the time of Boasberg’s order and therefore could not be returned.

The deportees were transferred to a prison in El Salvador that is known for human rights abuses. Family members have disputed that some of the migrants were gang members, and the government has acknowledged in court filings that many did not have criminal records in the United States.

El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, who agreed to jail the deportees in exchange for payment from the United States, appeared to celebrate their arrival in his country in the wake of Boasberg’s ruling.

“Oopsie… Too late” Bukele posted on X with a “crying from laughter” emoji and an image of a newspaper headline about the order.

The case has also spurred Republicans on Capitol Hill to seek ways to rein in federal judges, who have put temporary blocks on many of Trump’s initiatives while lawsuits challenging their legality proceed.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) said in opening remarks at a House Judiciary Committee hearing that it was a major problem “when a judge believes that he can order a full plane of criminal aliens back to U.S. soil essentially saying that 200 years of a statute is to be overturned by his quick order.”

This is a developing story. It will be updated.