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

Hundreds Farewell Layla Jeffery After She Was Found Dead in Bushland

A 13-year-old girl has been remembered as shy yet self-assured, cheeky yet…

Gavin Newsom’s Tax Filings Reveal Earnings Amid Wife Scrutiny

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom reported more…

Charges Dismissed Against Olympian Accused of Vandalizing Reflecting Pool

Charges have been dropped against former Olympian David Hearn, who had been…

Hamas Disarmament Vow: 5 Questions Shaping Gaza Peace Deal

WASHINGTON — Hamas says it is prepared to give up its arms,…

Mom Cuts Off Her Pretty Hair After Beach Sexual Assault

A Virginia mother says she was left so shaken by an alleged…

Hospital Worker Trying to Start Family With Wife Through IVF Is Mowed Down

A California hospital employee who had been trying to start a family…

Israel Says It Destroyed Hezbollah Terror Tunnels in Lebanon

The Israel Defense Forces demolished Hezbollah terror tunnels in the Beaufort area…

Coffee CEO Accused of Murdering 9-Year-Old Daughter Allegedly Had Condoms in Car

A coffee company chief executive accused of killing his nine-year-old daughter had…

Falcons Coach Jeff Ulbrich Breaks Silence on Wife Cristina’s Death

Atlanta Falcons head coach Raheem Morris delivered an emotional message of support…

Former Bay Area Deputy Accused of Lifting Weights While on Disability Leave

A former Bay Area sheriff’s deputy is facing the consequences after investigators…

Suffolk Wildfires Rage as Firefighters Battle Blaze for Day 3

Farmers have joined emergency teams in Suffolk as a major wildfire continues…

Sonoma County Woodside Fire Spreads Across California Wine Country

A fast-moving grass fire dubbed the “Woodside Fire” is burning through Sonoma…