The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a stay on a federal judge’s ruling that imposed restrictions on immigration stops by federal agents in Los Angeles, a decision that advocates argue is based on racial profiling.
U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong’s ruling, which covered the Central District of California, mandated that federal agents could not make immigration stops without reasonable suspicion that the individual is residing in the U.S. illegally.
Furthermore, Frimpong specified that reasonable suspicion cannot be established solely based on four factors, including: apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or accented English, being present in locations known to host undocumented immigrants, and working certain low-wage jobs such as landscaping or construction.
The Supreme Court’s order to pause Frimpong’s ruling allows the Trump administration’s appeal to proceed.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who supported the decision to grant the government’s request for a stay, articulated the limited function of judges in immigration matters.
In his opinion, Kavanaugh remarked that judges may have opinions about which policy is superior or more equitable, but they are not appointed to decide policy matters.
“Our role is to ensure that the Executive Branch operates within constitutional and statutory boundaries,” he emphasized.
Dissenting from the ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor offered a 21-page opinion, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Sotomayor characterized the court’s intervention as a
image source from：scotusblog
