Supreme Court Embraces Racial Profiling By ICE In LA

[Miles Archer]

In a decision that rubber-stamps racial profiling by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Los Angeles — and could accelerate deportations across America — the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that federal agents do not need reasonable suspicion to target someone for immigration detention, leaving the door open for any rationale immigration agents choose to use, including racial profiling.

The ruling comes after the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to block an order from a lower court that prohibited agents from using four racially loaded categories to justify arrests: apparent ethnicity, language spoken or accent, presence at a location where immigrants were believed to gather, or working in a particular kind of job. The order had snaked through the high court’s emergency, or “shadow,” docket since Aug. 7.

The decision overturns an order by U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong that had temporarily halted ICE agents in Los Angeles from making arrests or stops without reasonable suspicion. U.S. citizens and immigrants had been detained under the Trump administration’s directive to the Department of Homeland Security, often by masked and sometimes armed men. Frimpong found those raids were done illegally and, specifically, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/supreme-court-ice-la-racial-profiling_n_68bb4ac8e4b0a78951966a29?origin=home-latest-news-unit

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. I will never ever forgive or stop talking about the FUCKS who trashed Hillary

Even if they voted for her, they made sure everyone around them knew that she was almost as bad as the piece of shit so we know that meant ultimately hundreds of thousands or millions didn’t bother to vote at all.

[Walleye]

2. Gee, what a surprise, dammit we've got a Supreme Court that's in the tank

[Midnight Writer]

3. No probable cause, no habeas corpus, no due process, no equal protection, no legal warrants

What fucking Constitution are these guys reading from?

[sakabatou]

4. The one they wiped their own asses with.

[orangecrush]

16. This

[Nictuku]

5. This makes me wish I didn't wake up today

[ProudMNDemocrat]

6. Time for peaceful protests of the US Supreme Court building.

So they ruled against the 4th and 6th Amendments regarding searches, seizures, and Due Process?

NO American is safe in this country it seems.

[Miles Archer]

15. I remember when Boof Boy Kavanaugh wept and broke down over protesters who "ruined his steak dinner"

He actually discovered their presence after he finished his meal, paid the check, and was leaving.

Brett Kavanaugh Flees Steakhouse When Protesters Gather Outside
Apparently there's nothing in the Constitution that specifically protects eating in peace, quipped one Twitter wag.
Mary Papenfuss
By
Mary Papenfuss
Jul 8, 2022, 06:18 PM EDT

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-roe-protesters-mortons-steakhouse_n_62c8926be4b0359fa47b6389

Kavanaugh was dining Wednesday night at Morton’s restaurant in downtown Washington when protesters showed up out front, according to Politico. They called the manager to tell him to kick Kavanaugh out — and later tweeted that the justice soon slipped out the back, which Politico confirmed.

“Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton’s restaurant,” a representative said in a statement to Politico.

“Politics, regardless of your side or views, should not trample the freedom at play of the right to congregate and eat dinner. There is a time and place for everything. Disturbing the dinner of all of our customers was an act of selfishness and void of decency,” the statement added.

A source insisted to Politico that Kavanaugh didn’t see or hear the protesters and scarfed down his entire meal — with dessert — before ducking out the back to avoid the demonstrators.

[appmanga]

7. Years after defeating it in the states, the Supreme Court has made "Your papers please"...

...the reality for Latinos in this country. I'm sure this Court will bring back "Stop and frisk" if Trump asks their lapdog asses for it.

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

8. "Seemingly casting aside the issue of the Fourth Amendment, Kavanaugh wrote that when it comes to stops of individuals w

Seemingly casting aside the issue of the Fourth Amendment, Kavanaugh wrote that when it comes to stops of individuals who are in the U.S. legally but may find themselves under questioning by immigration agents nonetheless, the questioning in those circumstances is “typically brief and those individuals may promptly go free after making clear to the immigration officers that they are U.S. citizens or otherwise legally in the United States.”

[Ray Bruns]

10. Totally ignores any "probable cause" requirement in the fourth amendment.

[Mblaze]

11. Hitler's SS would let them go

If and when they proved that they weren't Jewish.... maybe.

[Johonny]

12. "Typically"

And Promptly. And making clear. How the fuck are these all defined?

[LeftInTX]

20. Not the easiest thing to do if you leave your wallet at home.

When, I go walking around the neighborhood I don't bring my purse.

Then, when they detain you, they rough you up and make it difficult to get to your ID. Duh...ICE detention is worse than jail detention because lack of due process.
You might sit there in detention for days.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

9. Deadline: Legal Blog--Supreme Court GOP majority grants Trump administration request for 'roving patrols'

Democratic appointees in dissent said the move is “unconscionably irreconcilable with our Nation’s constitutional guarantees.”

Supreme Court GOP majority grants Trump administration request for ‘roving patrols’ Supreme Court GOP majority grants Trump administration request for ‘roving patrols’ www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...

— 7Veritas4 (@justjonz.bsky.social) 2025-09-08T16:15:43.571Z

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-los-angeles-roving-patrols-emergency-relief-trump-rcna224611

The Supreme Court’s Republican-appointed majority has granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to lift an order that temporarily restrained the government’s “roving patrols” in Los Angeles. A California judge had ruled that plaintiffs who sued the government, including U.S. citizens, would likely succeed in their claim that officials are conducting such patrols without reasonable suspicion.

The high court’s three Democratic appointees dissented from the unexplained majority order Monday, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing for the trio that the Fourth Amendment’s historical protections from arbitrary government interference “may no longer be true for those who happen to look a certain way, speak a certain way, and appear to work a certain type of legitimate job that pays very little.” She called the majority’s move “unconscionably irreconcilable with our Nation’s constitutional guarantees.”.....

Opposing emergency high court relief, the plaintiffs countered that the judge’s order “broke no new legal ground,” writing that it “does not prevent the government from enforcing the immigration laws, conducting consensual encounters, or relying on any or all of the four factors along with other facts to form reasonable suspicion.”

They further wrote that the administration’s “extraordinary claim that it can get very close to justifying a seizure of any Latino person in the Central District [of California] because of the asserted number of Latino people there who are not legally present is anathema to the Constitution.”

[ananda]

13. Well, so much for the land of the free and the home of the brave...

Now the land of the hostages and the home of the cursed.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

14. "...[T]he legal profession [has no] clear way of dealing with a Supreme Court justice as dumb as Brett Kavanaugh.

Reposted by Mike Masnick

Jay Willis
‪@jaywillis.net‬

Follow
A little in the weeds, but I think it’s notable that Kavanaugh’s “racial profiling is OK if Mister Trump wants it” opinion is a concurrence, and none of the other conservatives joined it. Even Clarence Thomas was like “Look I’m down with the result but I’m not putting my name to that dogshit.”

‪Jay Willis‬
‪@jaywillis.net‬
· 1h
Said it before and I'll say it again: I do not think a legal profession that venerates the Supreme Court has a clear way of dealing with a Supreme Court justice as dumb as Brett Kavanaugh. This is the jurisprudential equivalent of him writing his name at the top in crayon with the "E" backwards.
September 8, 2025 at 12:59 PM

A little in the weeds, but I think it’s notable that Kavanaugh’s “racial profiling is OK if Mister Trump wants it” opinion is a concurrence, and none of the other conservatives joined it. Even Clarence Thomas was like “Look I’m down with the result but I’m not putting my name to that dogshit.”

— Jay Willis (@jaywillis.net) 2025-09-08T16:59:08.027Z

Jay Willis
‪@jaywillis.net‬

Follow
Said it before and I'll say it again: I do not think a legal profession that venerates the Supreme Court has a clear way of dealing with a Supreme Court justice as dumb as Brett Kavanaugh. This is the jurisprudential equivalent of him writing his name at the top in crayon with the "E" backwards.

‪Chris Geidner‬
‪@chrisgeidner.bsky.social‬
· 1h
This is a paragraph Brett Kavanaugh wrote on his little computer and then sent out into the world:

Moreover, as for stops of those individuals who are legally in the country, the questioning in those circumstances is typically brief, and those individuals may promptly go free after making clear to the immigration officers that they are U.S. citizens or otherwise legally in the United States.
ALT
September 8, 2025 at 12:05 PM

Said it before and I'll say it again: I do not think a legal profession that venerates the Supreme Court has a clear way of dealing with a Supreme Court justice as dumb as Brett Kavanaugh. This is the jurisprudential equivalent of him writing his name at the top in crayon with the "E" backwards.

— Jay Willis (@jaywillis.net) 2025-09-08T16:05:18.561Z

Reposted by Mike Masnick

Steven Mazie
‪@stevenmazie.bsky.social‬

Follow
SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in a college applicant's file is blatantly unconstitutional

ALSO SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in targeting whom to detain and deport is cool cool cool
September 8, 2025 at 12:43 PM

SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in a college applicant's file is blatantly unconstitutional

ALSO SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in targeting whom to detain and deport is cool cool cool

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie.bsky.social) 2025-09-08T16:43:32.469Z

[dalton99a]

17. The Trump Supreme Whorehouse doesn't disappoint.

[allegorical oracle]

18. Jackson and Sotomayer better be careful, else they are kidnapped and

transported to a foreign country.

As long as neither the suspicion of a crime nor due process are necessary to lawfully disappear people, then everyone in the country is fair game for ICE. What's next? Arrest of all Trump's perceived enemies?

Seems that's the greenlight that we've a) got our Constitutional crisis and b) gone fully fascist.

[Ollie Garkie]

19. The Fuuuuuuuuuccccccckkkkkkkk! nt

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

21. Anyone still think there will be free and fair elections????

[Hekate]

22. Well. Damn them all to hell...