SACRAMENTO, the United States, Sept. 9 (Xinhua) -- The U.S. Supreme Court's decision on Monday to allow federal immigration officers to conduct suspicionless immigration stops in California has drawn sharp criticism from local politicians and immigrant rights groups who warn of racial profiling and constitutional violations.
The nation's highest court sided 6-3 with the Trump administration in the case Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem, overturning a federal district judge's order that had banned U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from detaining people solely based on their race, language, job or location.
According to a statement released by American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Southern California hours after the Supreme Courts made the final decision, Pedro Vasquez Perdomo, the case's lead plaintiff, expressed his frustration with the ruling, saying that he joined the case because similar incidents happen to others "every day just for being brown, speaking Spanish, or standing on a corner looking for work."
The legal challenge arose after extensive immigration raids began across Los Angeles in June. Federal District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong had found substantial evidence that federal agents conducted stops without reasonable suspicion, violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches in the U.S. Constitution.
However, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a concurrence, wrote that "apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion," though it can be a relevant factor alongside others.
The three liberal justices dissented sharply. Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the majority for using the court's emergency procedures to make the decision without full review.
California Governor Gavin Newsom strongly condemned the decision, describing the Supreme Court's conservative majority as "the Grand Marshal for a parade of racial terror in Los Angeles."
"This isn't about enforcing immigration laws -- it's about targeting Latinos and anyone who doesn't look or sound like Stephen Miller's idea of an American, including U.S. citizens and children, to deliberately harm California's families and small businesses," a statement from the Governor's office read.
Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California, called the Supreme Court's decision "a devastating setback for our plaintiffs and communities," according to the organization's press release on Monday.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass characterized the decision as dangerous and un-American, warning that it represents "an attack on every person in every city in this country."
Thomas A. Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, argued the ruling relies on crude stereotypes and ignores that millions of citizens and legal residents in Los Angeles are also Latino and speak Spanish.
Farmworker union leader Teresa Romero warned the decision "puts farmworkers -- and every Californian who looks or sounds like they might be an immigrant -- in greater danger."
The United Farm Workers president noted, "This does not impact immigrants in a vacuum; it will affect all of us."
The Supreme Court's order does not stop the case from proceeding through the lower courts. On Sept. 24, the federal district court will hear arguments on whether to issue a preliminary injunction based on additional evidence of the government's enforcement tactics. ■
