The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of President Donald Trump’s administration, allowing federal agents to continue immigration raids in Southern California despite concerns about racial profiling.
The decision temporarily suspends a lower court ruling that had limited the ability of federal agents to stop or detain individuals without “reasonable suspicion” of illegal presence.
In July, a Los Angeles District Judge, Maame Frimpong, issued an order restricting the raids, citing probable violations of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
However, the Supreme Court’s brief, unexplained order now permits the Trump administration to resume the operations while the legal case moves forward.
This move has prompted dissent from the court’s three liberal justices. Justice Sonia Sotomayor sharply criticized the ruling, warning that the raids could treat “all Latinos, U.S. citizens or not, who work low-wage jobs” as potential detention targets.
She explicitly stated, “Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.”
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joining the majority, emphasized that ethnicity alone cannot justify reasonable suspicion, but it may be considered along with other factors during stops.
He pointed out that if federal officers determine that an individual is a U.S. citizen or legally residing in the country, they release the individual promptly.
The Justice Department defended the raids, explaining that they rely on a “reasonably broad profile” targeting areas with large populations of undocumented residents.
This ruling represents one of several legal wins for the Trump administration at the Supreme Court, which currently has a 6–3 conservative majority.
Since returning to office last year, Trump has pledged to increase deportations to record levels, setting a goal of 3,000 arrests daily.
The immigration raids, often conducted by armed agents wearing masks, have generated fear and protests within immigrant communities and led to multiple legal challenges.
