Critics fault Supreme Court for allowing immigration stops that consider race and ethnicity
Washington – Fifty years ago Supreme Court It was managed unanimously The US border patrol agents violated the constitution when they stopped a car on a highway near San Clemente, because their inhabitants seemed to be “Mexican descendants ..
4. The change protects the Americans from unreasonable searches, Justice said thenAnd the “Mexican view” of a driver does not justify stopping them to ask for his immigration status.
However, on Monday, when the Court decided to the Trump administration and cleared the way to stop and question the Latins that could be illegal here, on Monday. With 6-3 votes, justice set aside the temporary restriction order of a Los Angeles judge and prevented agents from stopping people according to their races or visible ethnic origins.
“The visible ethnic origin alone cannot provide reasonable doubt” said Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. “However, it may be a relevant factor considering the other prominent factors.”
The critics of the decision opened the door to allowing racial and ethnic prejudice.
UCLA law professor Ahilan Arulantham said, “Shocking and horrifying.
Arulantham said that Kavanaugh’s writings only spoke for justice and did not explain the court’s decision on a case from the emergency disk.
On the other hand, he and others said that the court under justice prohibited the use of race or ethnicity as a factor in university assumptions of John G. Roberts Jr..
“The elimination of race discrimination means eliminating them all,” Roberts wrote in 2023 for the 6-3 majority. This decision reduced the positive action policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
“Today, the Supreme Court took a step in a bad direction,” Ilya SominGeorge Mason University Professor of Law, Written on Volokh conspiracy blog. “It does not make sense to conclude that racial and ethnic discrimination is generally contrary to the constitution and that its use is ‘reasonable’ under the 4th change.”
The reports appeared before the decision before proved the status of ice agents with US citizens and legal permanent inhabitants, which has always forced many of them to start carrying documents.
In New York on Monday, a man outside a federal court was pushed by ice agents before showing his identity. Gone.
Times asked to respond to the increasing concern between US citizens, as a result of the decision can be sweeping in the expanded ice raids, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday, individuals should not worry.
Authorized, immigrant agents with the use of law enforcement intelligence carried out targeted operations, he added.
“The Supreme Court upholded the right to briefly stop questioning the Trump administration’s individuals in Los Angeles about the legal status of the Trump administration, because the law allowed it and this has been the Federal Government’s application for decades,” he said. “The law of immigration and nationality can briefly stop the immigrant officers’ questioning them about the immigration status of the individual, if there is a reasonable suspicion that the officer is illegally existing in the USA, and reasonable doubt is not only based on the race – based on the sum of the conditions.”
In X, the Democrats Assembly Security Committee responded to Leavitt’s comments: “ICE threw US citizens in jail. Trump advocates the creation of a racial profile.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out that almost half of the inhabitants of the Great Los Angeles in its opposition are Latino and can speak Spanish.
“Numerous people in the Los Angeles area were caught, thrown to the ground and handcuffed because of their appearance, accents and manual effort by making a living by making a living,” he wrote. “Today, the court unnecessarily makes more issues in these same anger.”
In the case, the “reasonable doubt” had the meaning.
The Court said that if they have seen something specific to the police and federal agents for decades that they could violate the law, they could stop and question someone.
However, the two sides could not agree on whether agents could stop people, because they looked like Latins and as daily workers, they worked in car wash or other low -paid jobs.
In addition to President Trump’s lawyers, Kavanaugh said that agents could make stops based on the “integrity of conditions ve and that may include people as well as ethnicity. They also pointed out data showing that approximately 10% of people in the Los Angeles region are illegal in the USA.
White House Border Consultant Tom Homan added that the legal standard of reasonable suspicion is “a group of factors you need to consider”, “racial profiles never happens”.
In an interview with MSNBC, Homan praises MSNBC a “wrong narrative” by praising the Supreme Court’s decision. “We do not arrest someone or detain someone without reasonable suspicion.”
Andrea Castillo, a Times personnel writer in Washington, contributed to this report.
