I do not support the suspension of habeous corpus in the U.S. for immigration enforcement under the current circumstances, either by the President or Congress. I do not even support all of the historical suspensions. Government always does things inefficiently and emotionally and mistakes are made and those mistakes need to be filtered out by process. I think that we can maybe consider maybe starting the process of discussing this strenuously dangerous option only in the environment of a Congressionally declared state of war.
I also do not support efforts by the open borders crowd and activist judges to misuse the process to prevent, delay, or unnecessarily complicate legally appropriate deportations.
I also don't like it when Presidents field ridiculous executive orders that everyone knows will be struck down by the Supreme Court, just to bounce it against the walls of possibility or to take advantage of the slow legal process of getting it through the court process. I didn't like it when Biden did it with OSHA and COVID vaccines and I don't like it when Trump does it either. A presidential suspension of habeous corpus in this situation, using the extremely weak legal backing that has been suggested, would not be supported by Justice Barrett nor Justice Roberts, and possibly not by Alito or Thomas either.
The words "involved in discussions" are deliberately obtuse and could mean anything between "Advisors drafted a memo for Trump to read that lists possible actions to consider and one of the hundred or so bullet points says to suspend habeous corpus" and "Trump is slamming fist on his desk and ordering that an executive order to be drafted that suspends habeous corpus".
This hubbub was triggered at the tail-end of the weekly news cycle. I think that was done on purpose to cause it to percolate in an information vacuum over the weekend. Either this was to gauge public response (likely) or to troll the Leftist side of the news media on something that will turn out tomorrow to be a nothing burger (less likely but possible).
We'll see.