SCOTUS Allows ICE to Keep Arresting Illegals in Sanctuary City Los Angeles
Share this @internewscast.com

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.

Share this @internewscast.com
You May Also Like

Trump Claims Unprecedented Progress Towards Ending Gaza Conflict

US President Donald Trump has announced that a peace agreement to conclude…

Couples Escape Death as Elephant Overturns Their Canoes

This harrowing incident occurred when two couples from the UK and US…

Dubai’s Billionaire Ruler Granted Approval to Demolish Surrey Mansion

The billionaire leader of Dubai has received approval to demolish his grand…

Inside the Ryder Cup with Rory McIlroy: The Real Story

Let’s be honest about what happened here at Bethpage Black in the…

Benny Blanco Faces Backlash Over Caption on First Post with Wife Selena Gomez

Benny Blanco has been mercilessly mocked online due to the caption of…

Mom Was So Intoxicated After the Party That She Drove Home on Her Knees

A businesswoman who consumed Pinot Grigio and tequila at the launch of…

Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban Separate: Observers Note Tense Body Language

Body language experts have revealed the major signs that proved Nicole Kidman…

Ex-ESPN Anchor Faces Harsh Backlash Over Tribute to Charlie Kirk

Former ESPN host Samantha Ponder revealed that she received “vicious” messages from…

Backstage Mayhem at Wheel of Fortune: Insider Stories Revealed

With four decades under his belt, it was always doubtful that anyone…

Noel Gallagher and Lily Allen Reunite to Commemorate Final Oasis Concert in the UK

Noel Gallagher celebrated the end of Oasis’ UK tour with a star-studded…

The Final Words of Mike Lynch Before Drowning After the Sinking of a Bayesian Yacht

The last words of British tech mogul Mike Lynch, who tragically perished…

Gaza Protest Disrupts Reeves’ Speech at Labour Conference

Rachel Reeves admitted tough ‘choices’ are coming in the Budget today amid mounting…