Washington – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the Trump administration ruled and agreed that U.S. immigration agents could stop and detain anyone they suspected of illegal in the United States, rather than washing a car, speaking Spanish or brown-skinned, based solely on work.
With a 6-3 advantage, the Supreme Justice Grant an emergency appeal And canceled the Los Angeles judge’s order that prohibits “patrols” from snatching people from the streets of Southern California based on their appearance, what language they speak, what job they do or happen to be.
In the agreed opinion, Brett M.’s immigration cessation based on reasonable suspicion of the illegal existence has been an important part of U.S. immigration enforcement for decades, in several presidential administrations,” he said.
The three liberals did not object.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the decision “another serious abuse of our emergency case files. We don’t have to live in a country where the government can grab any country that looks like Latino, speaks Spanish and seems to be working in low-wage jobs, rather than throwing it away while our constitutional freedom is lost, I’m missing.”
“The government declares that almost all Latinos, American citizens, regardless of low-wage jobs, are fair games that can be seized at any time and taken away from their jobs until they provide a proof of legal status to the satisfaction of the agents,” Sotomayor wrote.
Sotomayor also disagrees with Kavanaugh’s claim.
“Immigration agents did not conduct a ‘short stop questioning’, as agreed. They are using guns, physical violence and warehouse detention centers to catch people,” she wrote. “Nor are immigrants who have been harmed by government actions. U.S. citizens are also caught, taken from work and blocking their work to support themselves and their families.”
The decision was a major victory for Trump, clearing the way for the “largest mass expulsion” he often advertised in American history.
Starting in early June, Trump’s appointees targeted aggressive streets, which attracted long-term residents, legal immigrants and even U.S. citizens.
A coalition of civil rights organizations and local lawyers challenged the cases of three immigrants and two U.S. citizens and was caught in a messy arrest, claiming they were caught without reasonable doubts – a violation of the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.
On July 11, U.S. District Court Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong released Temporary restriction order Unless it is based solely on race or race, language, location or employment, whether individually or in combination.
July 28, The 9th Circuit Court of Appeal agrees.
The case is still in its early stages and the hearing is scheduled for a preliminary injunction this month. But even the Justice Department’s brief restrictions on mass arrests constitute “irreparable harm” to the government.
A few days later, Trump’s lawyers demand Supreme Court Shelve Frimpong’s orders. They say agents should be allowed to act with a common sense belief that Spanish-speaking Latinos may lack legal status in summer workers, car washes or landscaping and agriculture.
Attorney General D. John Sauer wrote in the appeal: “Reasonable suspicion is a low standard, below possible reasons.” He said agents could consider “the overall situation”, including “illegal existence is common in central areas.” [of California]1 out of every 10 people is an illegal alien. ”
Both sides said the region’s diverse demographics support their perception of the law. In its application to join the lawsuit, Los Angeles and 20 other Southern California municipalities believe that “half the population of the Central Region” now meets the government’s standard of reasonable doubt.
About 10 million Latinos live in the seven counties covered by the order and speak almost as much language than English.
Thor also questioned whether the plaintiffs indicted were arrested again because it was impossible for them to be arrested again.
The argument is the subject of sharp and extended doubt in the 9th Circuit, where a three-judge panel eventually rejected it.
“Agents have made many stops in the Los Angeles area within a few weeks, not years,” the group wrote in its July 28 comment.
The 9th Circuit said a plaintiff was stopped twice in a 10-day period to prove that he or anyone else might stop again, proving that he or anyone else might stop again.
A few days after the decision, armed Border Patrol agents jumped out from behind Penske’s moving truck and snatched workers from the parking lot of West Lake home warehouse, an apparent contempt of the court.
Immigration rights advocates urge judges not to intervene.
“The attack follows an unconstitutional model that officials vow to continue,” they said. The ruling on Trump would authorize “a very broad trawl that puts millions of law-abiding people at risk of federal agent detention.”
The judge’s order has been applied in a seven-county area, including Los Angeles and Orange counties, as well as Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo.
Savage reported from Washington that Sharp is from Los Angeles.
