## Facts

- Kurt Lüdecke, a German national lawfully residing in the United States, was interned during World War II as an “alien enemy” under the Alien Enemy Act of 1798.
- After Germany’s surrender and the end of active hostilities, the President issued a proclamation directing removal of alien enemies deemed dangerous to public safety.
- The Attorney General, after executive hearings, ordered Lüdecke removed on the ground that he was dangerous to public safety.
- Lüdecke remained detained pending removal and sought release by petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging the validity of the removal order.
- The federal district court denied relief, and the court of appeals affirmed; the Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether the Alien Enemy Act permits courts, in habeas proceedings, to review the merits of an executive removal order for an alien enemy deemed dangerous.
2. Whether a “declared war” continued to exist for purposes of the Alien Enemy Act after cessation of actual hostilities with Germany but before a formal termination of war.
3. Whether limiting judicial review of such removal orders violates constitutional protections, including due process.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of habeas relief.
- The Court held that the Alien Enemy Act precludes judicial review of the Executive’s discretionary determination that an alien enemy is dangerous and should be removed.
- The Court held that a “declared war” with Germany continued to exist despite the cessation of active hostilities, so the Act’s wartime predicate remained satisfied.
- The Court held that the Act, construed to allow judicial inquiry only into statutory validity and threshold predicates (including war status and alien-enemy status), does not violate the Bill of Rights.
- The Court held that executive hearings used to inform the dangerousness decision did not create a right to judicial retrial or evidentiary reweighing in court.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Alien Enemy Act, during a legally continuing “declared war,” the political branches may apprehend, restrain, and remove alien enemies under rules set by the President.
- Habeas corpus review is available only to test limited threshold matters, including whether a declared war exists and whether the detainee is an alien enemy within the statute.
- Courts may not review the merits of the Executive’s dangerousness determination or reexamine evidence from executive hearings conducted to inform that decision.
- The existence and continuation of a “declared war,” including whether it persists after fighting ends, is primarily committed to the political branches for determination in the first instance.

## Conclusion

The Court sustained executive removal authority over enemy aliens under the Alien Enemy Act during a legally continuing state of declared war, limiting habeas review to threshold statutory predicates and rejecting judicial review of the Executive’s discretionary dangerousness findings.


Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U.S. 160 (1948)