Supreme Court Hands Trump Victory: Greenlight for ICE to Resume ‘Roving’ Raids in Los Angeles
The Supreme Court has delivered another major win for President Donald J. Trump, siding with his administration’s effort to restore aggressive immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.
In a 6-3 decision, the Court lifted restrictions imposed by a Biden-appointed judge that had tied the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The ruling allows ICE to resume what critics have derisively called “roving” sweeps—operations targeting individuals based on common-sense factors such as gathering at day-laborer sites or struggling with English proficiency.
The Court’s Reasoning
While the majority did not issue a detailed explanation, Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored a separate opinion underscoring the legitimacy of the Trump administration’s policy. Kavanaugh emphasized that short, targeted interviews are appropriate when individuals meet several “common sense” indicators of unlawful presence in the country.
Liberal Dissent
Unsurprisingly, the Court’s three liberal justices opposed the decision. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, blasted the ruling with a sweeping statement:
“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job.”
Their dissent, however, fails to acknowledge the reality of rampant illegal immigration that has overwhelmed border states and fueled crime in major cities.
Lower Court Obstruction
The ruling halts an order from U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, a Biden appointee, who had barred ICE from relying on characteristics such as language, worksite, or appearance to identify possible illegal immigrants. Her July injunction accused ICE agents of acting as “roving patrols” without “reasonable suspicion.”
The Trump administration immediately challenged her order, with the Justice Department arguing that it placed law enforcement in a “straitjacket” at a time when the President has committed to restoring border security. A Ninth Circuit panel refused to fully block Frimpong’s injunction but offered only minor adjustments—until today’s Supreme Court intervention restored federal authority.
Enforcement Goals and Political Backlash
The dispute has been fueled by reports that the Trump White House set a daily goal of 3,000 immigration arrests. Although the Justice Department denied a formal quota, senior adviser Stephen Miller confirmed in a Fox News interview that such benchmarks were part of the administration’s tough stance.
Meanwhile, President Trump has not hesitated to send thousands of National Guard troops into Los Angeles to support federal immigration operations, even over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. While one lower court called the deployment unlawful, the Ninth Circuit placed that ruling on hold pending appeal.
Another Supreme Court Win for Trump
The immigration decision capped a day of legal victories for President Trump. Earlier, the Supreme Court granted his administration approval to dismiss Democratic FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. The administration argued successfully that presidents should have authority to remove members of so-called “independent agencies,” which in recent decades have amassed sweeping executive-like powers beyond accountability.
The Justice Department noted that the FTC’s authority has expanded dramatically since 1935, making its commissioners wield power that should be subject to direct presidential control. By agreeing to hear the case, the Supreme Court signaled its willingness to resolve the constitutional question once and for all.
Bottom Line
President Trump continues to deliver on his promise to restore law and order—whether it’s cracking down on illegal immigration or dismantling the administrative state. The Supreme Court’s latest rulings make clear that constitutional authority rests with the President, not with activist judges or unelected bureaucrats.