The Trump administration has appealed to the Supreme Court to allow immigration enforcement agents to continue 'roving patrols' in California, despite lower courts ruling that such practices likely violate the 4th Amendment by targeting individuals based on ethnicity or location. The case highlights ongoing tensions over immigration enforcement tactics and legal limits, with the administration arguing that factors like language and occupation can justify suspicion, while critics and lower courts see these as discriminatory and unlawful. The Supreme Court's decision is pending.
The Trump administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to lift restrictions on ICE's roving patrols in Southern California, arguing that the bans, upheld by lower courts, hinder immigration enforcement. Civil rights groups criticize the move, claiming it could lead to more aggressive and potentially unconstitutional arrests, especially targeting Latino communities. The case highlights ongoing tensions between immigration enforcement policies and constitutional protections, with significant implications for immigration law and civil rights.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a temporary restraining order blocking aggressive ICE 'roving patrols' in Southern California, emphasizing the need for reasonable suspicion in stops and criticizing the government's misreading of the order, with ongoing legal proceedings expected.
