The Supreme Court has issued a stay in the case of Perdomo v. Noem, allowing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to continue immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles. The decision, delivered by a 6-3 majority, permits DHS to resume actions that had been halted by a July ruling from federal judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong.
Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin commented on the outcome: “This is a win for the safety of Californians and the rule of law. DHS law enforcement will not be slowed down and will continue to arrest and remove the murderers, rapists, gang members, and other criminal illegal aliens that Karen Bass continues to give safe harbor.”
The Supreme Court’s decision upholds longstanding legal precedent regarding what constitutes “reasonable suspicion” under the Fourth Amendment. The ruling clarifies that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targets individuals who are illegally present in the United States.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh addressed Congress’s role in establishing immigration laws in his opinion:
“The fact remains that, under the laws passed by Congress and the President, [illegal aliens] are acting illegally by remaining in the United States – at least unless Congress and the President choose some other legislative approach to legalize some or all of those individuals now illegally present in the country. And by illegally immigrating into and remaining in the country, they are not only violating the immigration laws, but also jumping in front of those noncitizens who follow the rules and wait in line to immigrate into the United States through the legal immigration process.”
He further stated: “[I]t is also important to stress the proper role of the Judiciary. The Judiciary does not set immigration policy or decide enforcement priorities. It should come as no surprise that some Administrations may be more laissez-faire in enforcing immigration law, and other Administrations more strict. Article III judges may have views on which policy approach is better or fairer. But judges are not appointed to make those policy calls.”
