Supreme Court Allows 'Roving Patrols' By ICE To Continue In CA

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday lifted a temporary ban issued by a lower court judge that barred immigration agents from conducting "roving patrols" and detaining people based on their ethnicity or occupation.

The ruling comes amid a summer-long flurry of immigration enforcement activity in Southern California, in which federal agents detained people they say are suspected undocumented immigrants to interrogate them about their immigration status.

Lower courts found that Immigration and Customs Enforcement likely had not established the "reasonably suspicion" required to justify these stops — people were pulled aside based on how they look, what language they speak, their profession, or where they happen to be, the Los Angeles Times reported.

In a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of the Trump administration, granting an emergency appeal and lifting the lower court's earlier order.

The court did not provide an analysis explaining its decision. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the conservative justice who sided with Trump, wrote a concurring opinion that the circumstances the agents were considering “taken together can constitute at least reasonable suspicion of illegal presence in the United States," CNN reported.

“Immigration stops based on reasonable suspicion of illegal presence have been an important component of U.S. immigration enforcement for decades, across several presidential administrations,” he wrote.

Kavanaugh said it was important to note that "immigration officers may briefly stop the individual and inquire about immigration status.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who voted against the appeal, disagreed with Kavanaugh's stance.

“Immigration agents are not conducting ‘brief stops for questioning,’ as the concurrence would like to believe. They are seizing people using firearms, physical violence, and warehouse detentions,” she wrote. “Nor are undocumented immigrants the only ones harmed by the Government’s conduct. United States citizens are also being seized, taken from their jobs, and prevented from working to support themselves and their families.”

Monday's ruling stems from a lawsuit filed July 2 in Los Angeles federal court by Public Counsel, the American Civil Liberties Union, and attorneys representing Southern California residents who allege they were unlawfully stopped or detained by federal agents targeting locations where immigrant workers are traditionally hired.

The suit accused immigration officials of carrying out "roving patrols" and detaining people without warrants and regardless of whether they have actual proof they are in the country legally.

The two main plaintiffs in the case said they were arrested by armed, masked agents merely for sitting at a bus stop.

Plaintiff Pedro Vasquez Perdomo, 54, a day laborer of Pasadena, says he was waiting to be picked up for a construction job at a Metro bus stop in front of a Winchell's Donuts in Pasadena on the morning of June 18 when he and two others were surrounded by masked men with guns, arrested and taken to a detention center in Los Angeles, where he remained for three weeks. He has since been granted bond and released.

The men who took Vasquez Perdomo never identified themselves to the plaintiffs, never stated they were immigration officers authorized to make arrests, never stated that they had arrest warrants and never informed the plaintiffs of the basis for their arrests, the lawsuit alleges

"I am afraid that just standing outside can mean being taken again," Vasquez Perdomo said recently. "I was targeted because I'm Latino, because I'm a day laborer, because I'm invisible."

Vasquez Perdomo said he became a plaintiff in the case because "I don't want silence to be my story. I want justice, for me and for every other person whose humanity has been denied."

A federal judge ruled on the case later that month, barring immigration agencies "from conducting detentive stops in this district unless the agent or officer has reasonable suspicion that the person to be stopped is within the United States in violation of U.S. immigration law."

The order barred agents from agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement from relying solely on factors such as race/ethnicity, speaking with an accent or being at locations such as bus stops, day laborer sites, car washes or agricultural sites as a basis for detaining people.

The ruling was later upheld by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

City News Service contributed to this report.