Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a forceful dissent Monday against the high court’s ruling that permits immigration authorities to use racial profiling in certain enforcement actions, describing the decision as “unconscionably irreconcilable” with the U.S. Constitution.
In her dissent, Sotomayor condemned the ruling as effectively targeting individuals based on ethnicity, language, and occupation. She wrote,
“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.”
Documented Instances of ICE Misconduct
Sotomayor cited numerous documented cases in Los Angeles this year in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents reportedly used physical force against people they suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. These stops, she noted, often hinged on location, occupation, perceived race, or the language spoken by the individuals.
“Countless people in the Los Angeles area have been grabbed, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed simply because of their looks, their accents, and the fact they make a living by doing manual labor,” Sotomayor wrote. “Today, the Court needlessly subjects countless more to these exact same indignities.”
She further criticized both the Trump administration and the Supreme Court’s conservative majority for signaling that all Latinos—citizens and non-citizens alike—working low-wage jobs could be treated as targets for detention without sufficient cause.
“All Latinos, U.S. citizens or not, who work low wage jobs are fair game to be seized at any time, taken away from work, and held until they provide proof of their legal status to the agents’ satisfaction,” she stated, directly responding to Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion.
Background of the Case
The case arose from individuals who were stopped during immigration raids and challenged the government’s actions, arguing they violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. A U.S. district judge previously ruled that the raids had indeed breached constitutional protections.
The Trump administration appealed the ruling, and the Supreme Court, which has a conservative majority including three Trump-appointed justices, addressed it through its emergency, or “shadow,” docket last month.
Sotomayor Challenges Kavanaugh’s Characterization
Sotomayor singled out Kavanaugh’s description of the ICE raids as mere “brief stops for questioning,” arguing it ignored the real-world consequences. According to her dissent, ICE agents frequently employ firearms, physical force, and warehouse-style detentions. These tactics affect not only non-citizens but also U.S. citizens who are removed from their jobs and prevented from supporting their families.
“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,” she reiterated.
Constitutional Concerns
Sotomayor emphasized that the Fourth Amendment places the burden on the government to justify stops with reasonable suspicion. She argued that the majority’s decision effectively shifts this burden onto a broad group of individuals, creating a system of second-class citizenship:
“[I]t is the Government’s burden to prove that it has reasonable suspicion to stop someone. The concurrence improperly shifts the burden onto an entire class of citizens to carry enough documentation to prove that they deserve to walk freely. The Constitution does not permit the creation of such a second-class citizenship status.”
Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined Sotomayor in her dissent, aligning with her concerns over the constitutional and human rights implications of the ruling.
