On September 8th, the Supreme Court decided 6-3 on partisan lines to allow the Trump administration to continue their large-scale immigration raids in Los Angeles. This consequential ruling has significantly expanded the power of federal immigration law enforcement, giving agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sweeping powers to conduct mass immigration raids, including those that lower courts believed likely violated the 4th amendment. Civil rights groups, including the ACLU, believe that this ruling will expand intimidating “roving patrols” and discriminatory profiling in immigration enforcement, all the while setting a dangerous precedent on 4th Amendment rights.
Supreme Court Stays Lower Court Proceedings
Initially, the aggressive federal immigration raids were paused via temporary restraining order by U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, restricting federal immigration enforcement agencies from conducting indiscriminate raids: for example, simply using factors such as appearance, language, and occupations to conduct raids. The conservative Supreme Court, expediting the Trump administration’s emergency appeal, stayed the lower court proceedings, allowing for the raids to continue.
Almost immediately after the Supreme Court decision, DHS announced “Operation Midway Blitz,” an operation to conduct immigration raids in sanctuary cities like Chicago and Boston. In conjunction, the Trump administration has also been threatening deployment of the National Guard to blue cities to assist with law enforcement. This deployment, which Trump ordered during immigration protests in LA, was deemed illegal under the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer earlier this month. Judge Breyer reasoned that when the National Guard is federalized, it can only be deployed for domestic civilian law enforcement in cases of true “rebellion,” something that was not present in the Los Angeles protests. However, this case only applies to Los Angeles specifically, and it is already being appealed by the Trump administration.
Bigger Picture
In the minority, Justice Sotomayor wrote, “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. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.” She also condemned the conservative majority for using the court’s emergency (shadow) docket to quickly grant the Trump administration’s request rather than allowing the lower courts to continue with their proceedings. The bottom line of this decision and its resulting consequences seems to be a constitutional crisis. Effectively, the Supreme Court’s majority has ignored the plain language of the 4th Amendment and the long precedent of requiring reasonable suspicion for law enforcement stops, allowing for the indiscriminate detention of individuals.
The effects of the Supreme Court slowly expanding executive power are evident: it is emboldening the Trump administration to use federal law enforcement agencies as a sort of political tool, targeting Democratic-run cities for mass operations and even military deployment. All the while, agencies like ICE are gaining more funding while becoming less restrained—turning into the likes of a rogue military force for the executive.Looking forward, though support for Trump’s immigration policies is already falling, Americans can expect to see an escalation of immigration operations across the country as well as the possible deployment of the National Guard into metropolitan areas. The long-term consequences of this unprecedented use of executive power and immigration enforcement are yet to be seen, but what is clear is that whatever happens in the next few months will greatly shape the civil liberties, immigrant communities, constitutional precedent, and future of America.
Written by Christian Do
