The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday lifted lower-court restrictions that had barred Immigration and Customs Enforcement from carrying out certain immigration raids in Los Angeles, clearing the way for federal agents to resume operations while litigation over the matter proceeds.
The brief 6-3 order did not include a majority opinion explaining the move. The decision follows a July federal-court injunction that had blocked ICE activity in Los Angeles County on the grounds that agents were detaining individuals based on "apparent race or ethnicity," including speaking Spanish, a finding the Ninth Circuit had upheld before the high court intervened.
California political leaders and civil-rights advocates reacted sharply to the ruling. Gov. Gavin Newsom said the court’s action amounted to enabling what he called a "parade of racial terror" in Los Angeles, posting his remarks on the social platform X. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the order was "not only dangerous — it’s un-American and threatens the fabric of personal freedom in the U.S.," and vowed to continue defending residents' rights. Sen. Adam Schiff called the arrests "blatantly illegal" and warned the decision represented an attack on people across the country.
The court’s three-justice dissent, led by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, criticized the emergency order as "troubling" and warned against allowing the government to detain people based on appearances, language or perceived occupation. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately to concur in the court’s action, saying that while "apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion," it can be considered as one factor alongside others in determining whether to stop and question someone about immigration status.
The Department of Homeland Security welcomed the decision. DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said the ruling was "a win for the safety of Californians and the rule of law" and that DHS law-enforcement officers would continue to pursue arrests and removals of individuals alleged to be in the country illegally who are accused of serious crimes.
The dispute stems from enforcement actions this summer after the federal government ordered immigration officials to conduct operations in Los Angeles. Local officials said the raids targeted immigrants and led to protests and clashes in the city. Los Angeles has described itself as a sanctuary jurisdiction for undocumented immigrants, and city and state leaders have repeatedly clashed with the federal government over immigration policy.
Civil-rights groups and immigration activists had alleged that ICE criteria disproportionately targeted Latino residents, pointing to spoken Spanish and physical appearance as factors in stops and detentions. The district court that enjoined ICE activity in July found such practices likely unconstitutional; the Ninth Circuit affirmed that view before the Supreme Court granted emergency relief to the federal government.
The Supreme Court’s order leaves the underlying litigation unresolved and sends the case back into the courts while allowing federal agents to continue operations in the interim. The high court did not set forth a full legal ruling explaining its reasoning, leaving a fragmented public record consisting of a brief order, a concurrence and a dissent.
Legal observers said the case could have broader implications for how immigration enforcement interacts with constitutional protections against racial or ethnic discrimination. For now, the acquiescence of the high court permits ICE to operate in Los Angeles under federal direction, even as state officials and advocates continue to contest the legality of those operations in the courts.
