NextFin news, WASHINGTON — On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume immigration raids in the Los Angeles area by lifting a restraining order that had limited federal agents' ability to conduct stops based on race, language, job, or location. The ruling allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to carry out broader immigration enforcement operations in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles and surrounding counties.
The 6-3 decision, issued by the conservative majority of the Court, overturned a temporary restraining order issued on July 11 by U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong. The lower court had found that the immigration enforcement tactics were violating constitutional protections by targeting individuals based on racial and ethnic profiling. The restraining order barred immigration agents from making stops solely on the basis of apparent race, ethnicity, language spoken, presence at known immigrant gathering spots, or employment in certain jobs.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, stated that while ethnicity alone cannot justify reasonable suspicion, it can be considered along with other factors such as location and employment. He warned that judicial second-guessing of enforcement efforts could chill lawful immigration enforcement. The Court’s order was issued without a full explanation, consistent with emergency docket procedures.
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, criticized the ruling as eroding constitutional freedoms. Sotomayor wrote that the decision effectively permits the government to seize individuals based on their Latino appearance, language, and low-wage employment, describing it as a grave misuse of the Court’s emergency docket.
The case originated from a lawsuit filed by immigrant advocacy groups and individuals, including U.S. citizens, who alleged that ICE’s roving patrols in Los Angeles engaged in unconstitutional stops and detentions targeting brown-skinned people. The raids, which began in June 2025, focused on locations such as car washes, parking lots where day laborers gather, and garment factories, disrupting immigrant communities.
Federal attorneys argued that immigration officers target individuals based on suspected illegal presence in the U.S., not on race or ethnicity. However, the plaintiffs contended that the enforcement tactics amounted to racial profiling and violated the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Supreme Court’s decision allows the Trump administration to continue its immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles while the underlying legal case proceeds. A hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction is scheduled for September 24 before Judge Frimpong.
Local officials and immigrant rights advocates condemned the ruling. Assemblyman Mark González of Los Angeles called it "government-sanctioned oppression" and said it undermines constitutional protections against government overreach and racism. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, described the decision as a devastating setback for communities subjected to immigration stops based on skin color, occupation, or language.
The ruling comes amid heightened immigration enforcement efforts by the Trump administration, including federal deployments in Washington, D.C., and other areas. Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli of the Central District of California praised the Supreme Court’s decision, emphasizing the importance of enforcing immigration laws.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
