September 8, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 emergency ruling on the Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo case, temporarily allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to resume roving immigration raids in Los Angeles, California. This proceeding allows agents to stop individuals based on traits such as assumed ethnicity, language and location. Even after attempts by lower courts to block these practices, the Supreme Court decision overpowers other voices due to the supremacy clause, so ICE will resume broad enforcement practices.
“This breaks the Supreme Court ruling United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, which states that it is illegal for border patrol agents to stop a car just because the car has people who are of Hispanic descent. This also violates the 4th amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures, and last I checked, ethnicity, accents or location are not justifiable causes for search and seizures,” magnet senior Collin Thompson said.
This case opened July 11, 2025, when the U.S. District Judge Maam Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong issued a preliminary injunction, which blocked the Trump Administration’s roving arrests surrounding Los Angeles. Frimbog noticed that ICE agents began conducting stops without reasonable suspicion, instead, stopping individuals due to their physical features and traits, like skin color. The 52-page opinion that Judge Frimpong issued granted two main restraining orders, one stopping ICE and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents from conducting stops without reasonable suspicion, and the other requiring that detainees gain immediate access to attorneys. The Trump Administration requested a pause in the ruling while they appealed it, but Judge Frimpong refused and argued that the government did not follow proper procedure for the request and failed to show how the ruling would cause them serious harm.
The case moved to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, where a panel containing three judges, Ronald M. Gould, Marsha S. Berzon and Jennifer Sung, reviewed the case. The three judges agreed with Judge Frimbong and decided to keep the ban in place as they believed ICE’s tactics violated the Constitution. The court argued that no evidence revealed that the stops occurred based on anything other than characteristics of the individual, which potentially violates the Equal Protection Clause. Even after losing at both courts, the administration decided to appeal to the Supreme Court, which temporarily overturned the rulings.
The Supreme Court presented the emergency ruling through a shadow docket in an attempt to decide if ICE can conduct roving immigration patrols without reasonable suspicion or if these tactics violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and promote racial profiling. The vote ended in a 6-3 result, which lifted the lower court’s injunctions and allowed ICE to resume its enforcement operations in Los Angeles immediately. The majority, led by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, argued that the use of specific traits of an individual serves as a cause to establish reasonable suspicion when combined with other indicators. The dissenting opinion, led by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, warned that this decision legalizes racial profiling and violates the Fourth Amendment.
“We should not live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish and appears to work a low-wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent. After today, that [the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protecting everyone] may no longer be true for those who happen to look a certain way, and appear to work a certain type of legitimate job but pays very little,” Sotomayor said.
This decision led to concerns from the public and civil rights organizations about normalizing racial profiling. Even though this case specifically affects Los Angeles and the surrounding areas, citizens around the U.S. feared this case as they believe it serves as a dangerous precedent for future decisions. The public’s opinion shifted due to this decision, leading to a stronger divide on immigration standpoints. This decision specifically worries immigrant families around the U.S. as they feel unprotected by the law. This temporary decision could lead to similar roving patrols in other major cities and could allow for increased rates of deportation. ICE plans to continue searches in the Los Angeles area in an attempt to detain undocumented immigrants.
