The U.S. Supreme Court, split 6-3 along ideological lines, eliminated limits that had barred the Trump administration from conducting broad immigration raids based on generalized criteria in the Los Angeles region. The ruling places a temporary hold on an injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, who had criticized the practices—dubbed “roving” sweeps by critics—as likely unconstitutional. Judge Frimpong determined that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents were arresting individuals without “reasonable suspicion,” relying instead on stereotyping variables like speaking Spanish, perceived low-wage work, or gathering at common day labor spots like car washes and Home Depot parking lots.

The majority of the high court provided no public explanation for granting the administration’s emergency petition to halt the restrictions. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately in support, arguing that it is appropriate to conduct brief interviews with individuals meeting “common sense” criteria for being in the country illegally, such as working in day labor or having limited English proficiency. This was met with a strong dissent from the liberal wing. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, 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.”

The Justice Department had appealed the lower court ruling, claiming the limits were a “straitjacket” hindering President Donald Trump’s mass-deportation policy, which was allegedly driven by a controversial quota of 3,000 daily arrests. In a related victory for the Trump administration on the same day, the Supreme Court also approved the dismissal of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) member Rebecca Slaughter, advancing the constitutional question of a president’s power to fire the heads of independent agencies.