• The US Supreme Court permits federal immigration raids in California that may use racial profiling.
• Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the ruling, stating it makes Latinos "fair game" for unjust actions.
• The decision overrides a previous federal judge's order aimed at protecting civil liberties.
• The case involves significant constitutional implications concerning the Fourth Amendment.
• This ruling underscores the strong conservative majority in the Supreme Court during Trump's administration.

The U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed President Donald Trump's aggressive immigration policies by allowing federal agents to proceed with deportation raids in Southern California, overruling a lower court's restrictions. This decision enables immigration agents to target individuals based on factors such as race, language, or perceived ethnicity during enforcement actions, despite concerns regarding civil liberties violations within immigrant communities. The court granted the Justice Department's request to lift a temporary order issued by U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong, which prohibited agents from making stops lacking "reasonable suspicion" of illegal status, according to Reuters, TRT World, India Times, and Al Jazeera.

The ruling, which passed with a 6-3 conservative majority, prompted dissent from the court's liberal justices, notably Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She highlighted that the decision effectively subjects “all Latinos, US citizens or not, who work low-wage jobs” to arbitrary detention and threats of deportation, a viewpoint echoed by numerous advocacy groups. Sotomayor stated, “Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent,” according to SFGate, BBC, and South China Morning Post.

BBC and TRT World.

Since the initiation of these immigration raids in 2025, reports have surfaced of their disproportionate impacts on communities of color, including U.S. citizens. Many individuals have claimed they were unlawfully detained based on superficial assessments of race or language, which critics argue resembles racially biased policing practices. Lawsuits filed by immigrant advocacy organizations argue that these operations represent a disturbing trend towards systemic racial profiling, as noted by India Times and South China Morning Post.