SCOTUS Allows ICE to Keep Arresting Illegals in Sanctuary City Los Angeles

The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to bypass a lower court’s decision. This earlier ruling had prevented Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from conducting federal immigration enforcement activities, citing these actions as racial profiling.

In July, Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by then-President Joe Biden. She had stopped ICE from executing raids in the sanctuary area of Los Angeles, California.

Before the Trump administration sought SCOTUS’s intervention to let ICE persist in capturing illegal immigrants in Los Angeles during the legal proceedings, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had supported Frimpong’s decision.

On Monday, Justice Kavanaugh, representing the conservative majority in a 6-3 decision, stated that “the government has adequately demonstrated the need for a stay while the appeal is pending.”

Justice Kavanaugh emphasized that “stopping individuals based on reasonable suspicions of unlawful presence has long played a critical role in U.S. immigration enforcement efforts for decades, spanning multiple presidential terms.” With the current rise in illegal immigration under Biden, ICE’s attention on Los Angeles appears justified.

Kavanaugh further noted, “Individuals in the country illegally seeking to avoid law enforcement questioning are essentially aiming to bypass the law, which does not constitute a significant legal interest.”

Meanwhile, Justice Sotomayor, in writing a dissenting opinion that Justices Kagan and Jackson joined, called the court’s stay on the lower court’s decision “yet another grave misuse of our emergency docket.”

“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low-wage job,” Sotomayor writes. “Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.”

The case is Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo, No. 25A169 in the Supreme Court of the United States.

You May Also Like

The Question Thomas Markle’s Family Must Be Asked: Maureen Callahan

How long must the public wait for answers? It is deeply troubling…

Who Is Stephen Miller? Trump’s Controversial New Chief of Staff

Stephen Miller, one of Donald Trump’s most loyal and controversial political allies,…

Did Harry and Meghan’s Return Inspire Sarah Ferguson’s UK Comeback?

Sarah Ferguson has never been known for doing things quietly, and her…

UK Boy, 3, With Five Heart Conditions Needs £400,000 for Life-Saving US Surgery

A three-year-old boy born with five rare heart conditions is in a…

CDC Warns Flu Activity Is Rising Across Many Parts of the US

Flu activity is rising sharply across much of the US, with health…

Bullies Filmed Themselves Beating Terrified Disabled Teen

Four men have been arrested after disturbing video emerged showing a disabled…

Paraguay President Santiago Peña Investigated Over Bank Collapse, Faces Possible Removal from Office

ASUNCIÓN, Paraguay — Paraguayan President Santiago Peña is facing a criminal investigation…

Katie Miller, the MAHA Movement Strategist, Emerges as a Rising Political Force

Stephen Miller became one of Washington’s biggest stories Friday after President Trump…

Meghan Markle Calls for ‘Thorough Investigation’ Into Father Thomas Markle

The Duchess of Sussex is reportedly hoping for a “full and thorough…

Jessica Simpson Reveals Sexual Awakening With Nashville Boytoy

A little over a year ago, Jessica Simpson openly hinted that she…

Somali Day-Care Owner Whose Firm Was Tied to Fraud Wins Minnesota Seat

Abdi Daisane, a Somali-born daycare owner whose business has received millions of…

Labour’s Uber-Style Rail Pricing Plans Could Push Fares Sharply Higher

Rail passengers could face higher fares from 2027 after Labour appeared to…