LOS ANGELES – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court lifted court-ordered restrictions on immigration stops by federal agents in Los Angeles.
In July, U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong placed a restraining order on “roving patrols” of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents conducting raids in and around LA. The order barred immigration agents from stopping people based solely on their race, language, job or location. Judge Frimpong made the decision after several U.S. citizens were detained by ICE agents. One of those U.S. citizens detained was Job Garcia, a Los Angeles resident who was held for more than 24 hours after agents violently arrested him at a Home Depot where he was making a delivery. MALDEF is representing Garcia in a claim for damages against the federal government.
On Monday, the Supreme Court overturned the district court’s restraining order. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote an opinion saying that the order went too far in restricting how ICE agents could make stops.
Please attribute the following statement to MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) President and General Counsel Thomas A. Saenz:
“Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence is outrageous and unbefitting any jurist committed to the Constitution.
“First, his opinion rests on crude and unsupported assumptions and stereotypes about the undocumented; no stay of an order requiring compliance with the Constitution should rest on such a lack of evidence. Second, he completely disregards the consequential, demographic fact that millions of citizens and lawful residents of the Los Angeles community are also Latino and also speak Spanish.In effect, Kavanaugh sacrifices the rights of all Latinos to the false Trumpist idol of unconstrained immigration enforcement. Third, he ignores other demonstrated and critical context – like the fact that many of those detaining and questioning folks were in unmarked vehicles, masked, and in civilian clothes. That is a relevant consideration as to how these activities – including racial and language stereotyping — are occurring in a lawless and dangerous manner.
“Finally, while he makes clear that excessive force is cause for concern, he asserts that enforcement of that specific constitutional prohibition will somehow prevent it. That is ludicrous; today’s decision will catalyze activity that will lead to widespread violations of clear constitutional rights, including the ban on undue force.
“We can and should expect far better of our Supreme Court justices than what they did this morning. The Court’s reputation and legitimacy took a major, self-inflicted blow today.”