The United States Supreme Court again supported the hard line immigration approach of President Donald Trump again on Monday, allowing the agents to proceed with the raids in southern California aimed at people for deportation based on their race or language, in a decision that, according to a dissident judge, makes Latinos “easy prey to be captured at any time.”
The Court granted a request from the Department of Justice to suspend the order of a judge that temporarily prohibits agents to stop or detain people without a reasonable “suspicion” that they are in the country illegally, based on the breed or ethnic origin, or if they speak Spanish or English with an accent, among other factors. The administration quickly promised to continue with the “itinerant patrols.”
The three liberal judges of the Supreme Court publicly dismitted, directing direct criticisms to the most conservative.
The Administration “has practically declared that all Latinos, US citizens or not, who work in low -salaries jobs are easy prey to be captured at any time, taken from work and retained until they provide evidence of their legal status to the satisfaction of the agents,” Judge Sotomayor wrote in the dissident opinion.
“Instead of getting your arms crossed while our constitutional freedoms are lost, disagree,” added Sotomayor.
The US District Judge Frimpong, based in Los Angeles, determined on July 11 that the actions of the Trump administration probably violated the protection of the fourth amendment of the EU Constitution against registries and unuthors irrazonable. The judge’s order was applied to the jurisdiction of his court that covers much of southern California.
The order of the Supreme Court was brief and issued without any explanation, a common way in which it manages emergency issues, but that has generated confusion in the lower and criticisms of some of the judges themselves. The Court has a conservative majority of 6-3.
The United States Attorney General, PAM Bondi, appointed by Trump, described Monday’s decision as a “massive victory” and wrote on social networks that immigration agents can now “continue to perform traveling patrols in California without judicial micrognition.”
A demand that challenges the raids accused the administration of using itinerant patrols by masked and strongly armed agents who have made interrogations and arrests based on racial profiles that resemble “shameless kidnappings at noon.”
“Persons with brown skin are addressed or removed by unidentified federal agents, suddenly and with a demonstration of strength, and they are asked questions about who they are and where they are,” said the demand.
A group of Latinos trapped in the raids, including some who are US citizens, filed the collective claim proposed in a Federal Los Angeles court in July.
Mohammad Tajsar, lawyer of the American Union of Civil Liberties of Southern California that helps represent the plaintiffs, promised to continue fighting against the “racist deportation scheme” of the administration.
You may be interested: After racing in an Hyundai plant, Trump urges foreign companies to hire Americans
EU Supreme Court supports Trump in aggressive migratory raids
“This decision is a devastating setback for our plaintiffs and communities that, for months, have been subject to immigration arrests due to the color of their skin, occupation or the language they speak,” said Tajsar.
A plaintiff, Pedro Vásquez Perdomo, said in a statement that he joined the case because “what happened to me is happening to others every day just being Moreno, speaking Spanish or standing in a corner looking for work.”
He said that the agents did not explain why they grabbed him and that they did not have a court order.
“They treated me as if it didn’t matter: locked up, cold, hungry and without a lawyer. Now, does the Supreme Court say it’s okay? That is not justice. That is racism with a plaque,” he said.
Coinciding with Monday’s decision, the conservative judge Brett Kavanaugh said that “the apparent ethnic origin alone cannot provide reasonable suspicion”, but it can be a “relevant factor ‘when considered together with other prominent factors.”
Kavanaugh added: “If the officers find out that the person they arrested is an American citizen or legally in the United States, they let her go immediately.”
The Trump administration has repeatedly asked the Supreme Court this year that allows it to continue with the policies that the lower courts have prevented after questioning their legality.
The Court has backed Trump in most cases. For example, it has allowed Trump to deport migrants to countries other than their own without offering the opportunity to show the damage they can face and revoke the temporary legal status previously granted by the Government for humanitarian reasons to hundreds of thousands of migrants.
Trump won the elections last year for a second term as president with promises of record level deportations. The immigration raids of their administration, even in Los Angeles, have caused panic in immigrant communities, as well as protests, and have generated demands for aggressive tactics.
Trump sent Troops from the National Guard and American Marines to Los Angeles in June in response to protests against federal immigration raids, which marks an extraordinary use of military force within the United States to support the operations of the Civil Police.
The local officials and the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, challenged the deployment as illegal and unnecessary.
Frimpong issued the temporary restriction order that stops stops or arrests for breed, language, presence in a particular place, such as car wash or a towing patio, or type of work to establish a “reasonable suspicion” of illegality. The judge was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden.
The Appeals Court of the Ninth US Circuit, based in San Francisco, refused on August 1 to lift Frimpong’s order.
With Reuters information.
Do you use more Facebook? Follow us to always be informed
