Just today, the Supreme Court lifted a lower court’s order restricting immigration stops in Los Angeles, allowing federal agents to continue aggressive operations that critics say amount to racial profiling, The New York Times reports.
The unsigned order gave no reasoning, and the case remains under review in the Ninth Circuit, meaning the issue could return to the high court. The three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor warning that the ruling permits agents to target people simply for looking Latino, speaking Spanish, or working low-wage jobs.
The dispute stems from a lawsuit accusing the administration of conducting unconstitutional sweeps in which thousands of day laborers, farmworkers, and other low-wage workers have been detained. US District Judge Maame Frimpong had barred agents from using factors such as ethnicity, language, location, or type of work as grounds for immigration stops. Her ruling sharply limited President Donald Trump’s efforts to accelerate deportations, but the Supreme Court’s order has now suspended those restrictions.
The majority offered no explanation, but Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a concurring opinion, defended the enforcement practices as a response to demographic realities. He noted that about 10 percent of Los Angeles residents are undocumented and argued that while ethnicity alone cannot justify a stop, it can be a relevant factor when combined with other signs, such as employment in day labor or agriculture. Civil rights advocates countered that such reasoning effectively criminalizes Latino identity and legitimizes indiscriminate targeting.
Justice Sotomayor’s dissent forcefully rejected Kavanaugh’s position, accusing the majority of sanctioning a system where all Latinos who work low-wage jobs are “fair game” for detention. She emphasized that countless people had already been handcuffed, thrown to the ground, or humiliated in encounters that go far beyond “brief questioning.” To her, the decision represents not only an erosion of constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures but also a broader failure by the Court to safeguard minority rights.
Local leaders and civil rights groups warned of broad fallout. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the decision was an attack not just on her city but on every community nationwide. Videos of armed agents rounding up Hispanic residents have fueled protests and heightened tensions in immigrant neighborhoods.
The case highlights deep divisions over immigration enforcement and the Court’s growing reliance on unexplained emergency rulings.
Sotomayor criticized the majority for bypassing normal appellate processes without providing clarity, calling the lack of transparency “troubling.”
Advocates, including the ACLU, pledged to keep fighting what they describe as racist deportation schemes, while the administration insisted agents are exercising judgment.
For now, however, the ruling gives federal officials wide latitude to resume immigration sweeps in Los Angeles—and perhaps beyond.