Trump asks SCOTUS to allow profiling in California ICE raids

[Zincwarrior]

Trump admin wants to arrest people based on how they look and what language they are speaking. I am sure it will be fine, I mean, whats wrong with arresting people based on the color of their skin amirite?

Trump asks SCOTUS to allow profiling in California ICE raids​

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/scotus-immigration-california-20809308.php

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow officers to arrest suspected undocumented immigrants in Southern California because of how they look, what language they’re speaking and what kind of work they’re doing, factors that federal judges have found to be baseless and discriminatory.

Last month’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Maame Frimpong, upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, “threatens to upend immigration officials’ ability to enforce the immigration laws in the Central District of California,” D. John Sauer, the Justice Department’s solicitor general, said Thursday in a filing with the Supreme Court. “This Court should end this attempted judicial usurpation of immigration-enforcement functions” and suspend the injunction while the case is argued in the lower courts, Sauer wrote.

The Central District, which includes Los Angeles County and six other counties, has nearly 20 million residents, more than any other federal court district in the nation. It became the focus of legal disputes over immigration enforcement after President Donald Trump took control of the California National Guard in June and sent thousands of its troops to the streets in Los Angeles to defend immigration agents against protesters of workplace raids.

 

[1srelluc]

LOL

If they run they are an illegal....If they stand still they are a well disciplined illegal.

 

[Winston]

LOL

If they run they are an illegal....If they stand still they are a well disciplined illegal.

Wow, and I thought you were a country boy. If they run, they are legal, if they stand still they are illegal. I mean damn, you out hunting with a friend. You're over the bag limit, your friend is not. Game warden shows up, which one runs? The one not over the bag limit, the game warden chases him only to catch him completely legit and you are long gone.

 

[rightwinger]

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow officers to arrest suspected undocumented immigrants in Southern California because of how they look, what language they’re speaking and what kind of work they’re doing, factors that federal judges have found to be baseless and discriminatory.

People have a right to be left alone

Government harassing people based on their looks, language, job used to be clearly unconstitutional.

With the Roberts court, it does not appear safe

 

[Winston]

Trump admin wants to arrest people based on how they look and what language they are speaking. I am sure it will be fine, I mean, whats wrong with arresting people based on the color of their skin amirite?

Trump asks SCOTUS to allow profiling in California ICE raids​

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/scotus-immigration-california-20809308.php

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow officers to arrest suspected undocumented immigrants in Southern California because of how they look, what language they’re speaking and what kind of work they’re doing, factors that federal judges have found to be baseless and discriminatory.

Last month’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Maame Frimpong, upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, “threatens to upend immigration officials’ ability to enforce the immigration laws in the Central District of California,” D. John Sauer, the Justice Department’s solicitor general, said Thursday in a filing with the Supreme Court. “This Court should end this attempted judicial usurpation of immigration-enforcement functions” and suspend the injunction while the case is argued in the lower courts, Sauer wrote.

The Central District, which includes Los Angeles County and six other counties, has nearly 20 million residents, more than any other federal court district in the nation. It became the focus of legal disputes over immigration enforcement after President Donald Trump took control of the California National Guard in June and sent thousands of its troops to the streets in Los Angeles to defend immigration agents against protesters of workplace raids.

Let's just go straight to the filing with the court.

Not only is the Central District the Nation’s most populous district overall; at best estimate, it harbors some 2 million illegal aliens out of its total population of nearly 20 million people, making it by far the largest destination for illegal aliens. Given the Administration’s commitment to enforcing the Nation’s immigration laws—under which illegal aliens are subject to investigative stops and detention to facilitate removal—it should be no surprise that the Los Angeles area is a top enforcement priority. When immigration-enforcement stops involve briefly detaining a suspected illegal alien, they must comply with the Fourth Amendment's reasonable suspicion requirement—a low bar that “is considerably less than * ** a preponderance.” United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7 (1989). Like most Fourth Amendment tests, that context-specific inquiry requires considering the totality of the circumstances. And here, those circumstances necessarily include that illegal presence is widespread in the Central District, where 1 in every 10 people is an illegal alien; that‘many locations unlawfully employ illegal aliens and are known to hire them on a day to-day basis; that certain types of jobs—like day labor, landscaping, and construction—are most attractive to illegal aliens because they often do not require paperwork; that the vast majority of illegal aliens in the District come from Mexico or Central America; and that many only speak Spanish.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26044235/25a169.pdf

Damn, first question, if these locations are employing illegal aliens why don't ICE go after them? But as I wade the brief I can't believe how amateurish is, well, then again, perhaps not.

Basically, ICE is asking to be able to use a person's "apparent" race, the language they are speaking, the place that are standing, or the trade they practice, as sufficient means for probable cause. Now not all four mind you, just any one of those four. I mean let's break this down. It is called "probable" cause. It must have some factual basis, not a general assumption or a stereotype.

So, are MOST people that look HIspanic illegals?

Are MOST people that speak Spanish illegals?

Are MOST people in the Home Depot parking lot illegals?

Are MOST people working construction and doing field work illegals?

Unless they can make that case, then there is nothing to talk about here.

 

[Zincwarrior]

So, are MOST people that look HIspanic illegals?

In California, Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico? Nope. You're also literally talking millions of citizens.

Are MOST people that speak Spanish illegals?

Legal immigrants speak Spanish as well. People who have been here for generations speak Spanish. Spanish was spoken here before the US was a country.

Are MOST people in the Home Depot parking lot illegals?

Thats going to be problematic for HD...

Are MOST people working construction and doing field work illegals?

An interesting question. Which state?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

So Trump is asking for permission to violate the Constitution.

 

[Meathead]

Trump admin wants to arrest people based on how they look and what language they are speaking. I am sure it will be fine, I mean, whats wrong with arresting people based on the color of their skin amirite?

Trump asks SCOTUS to allow profiling in California ICE raids​

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/scotus-immigration-california-20809308.php

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow officers to arrest suspected undocumented immigrants in Southern California because of how they look, what language they’re speaking and what kind of work they’re doing, factors that federal judges have found to be baseless and discriminatory.

Last month’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Maame Frimpong, upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, “threatens to upend immigration officials’ ability to enforce the immigration laws in the Central District of California,” D. John Sauer, the Justice Department’s solicitor general, said Thursday in a filing with the Supreme Court. “This Court should end this attempted judicial usurpation of immigration-enforcement functions” and suspend the injunction while the case is argued in the lower courts, Sauer wrote.

The Central District, which includes Los Angeles County and six other counties, has nearly 20 million residents, more than any other federal court district in the nation. It became the focus of legal disputes over immigration enforcement after President Donald Trump took control of the California National Guard in June and sent thousands of its troops to the streets in Los Angeles to defend immigration agents against protesters of workplace raids.

Given the profile of the average illegal, I see nothing wrong with that.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Let's just go straight to the filing with the court.

Not only is the Central District the Nation’s most populous district overall; at best estimate, it harbors some 2 million illegal aliens out of its total population of nearly 20 million people, making it by far the largest destination for illegal aliens. Given the Administration’s commitment to enforcing the Nation’s immigration laws—under which illegal aliens are subject to investigative stops and detention to facilitate removal—it should be no surprise that the Los Angeles area is a top enforcement priority. When immigration-enforcement stops involve briefly detaining a suspected illegal alien, they must comply with the Fourth Amendment's reasonable suspicion requirement—a low bar that “is considerably less than * ** a preponderance.” United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7 (1989). Like most Fourth Amendment tests, that context-specific inquiry requires considering the totality of the circumstances. And here, those circumstances necessarily include that illegal presence is widespread in the Central District, where 1 in every 10 people is an illegal alien; that‘many locations unlawfully employ illegal aliens and are known to hire them on a day to-day basis; that certain types of jobs—like day labor, landscaping, and construction—are most attractive to illegal aliens because they often do not require paperwork; that the vast majority of illegal aliens in the District come from Mexico or Central America; and that many only speak Spanish.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26044235/25a169.pdf

Damn, first question, if these locations are employing illegal aliens why don't ICE go after them? But as I wade the brief I can't believe how amateurish is, well, then again, perhaps not.

Basically, ICE is asking to be able to use a person's "apparent" race, the language they are speaking, the place that are standing, or the trade they practice, as sufficient means for probable cause. Now not all four mind you, just any one of those four. I mean let's break this down. It is called "probable" cause. It must have some factual basis, not a general assumption or a stereotype.

So, are MOST people that look HIspanic illegals?

Are MOST people that speak Spanish illegals?

Are MOST people in the Home Depot parking lot illegals?

Are MOST people working construction and doing field work illegals?

Unless they can make that case, then there is nothing to talk about here.

in S.Cal in all those questions a good percentage probably are illegals.....

 

[rightwinger]

Given the profile of the average illegal, I see nothing wrong with that.

So anyone who looks Hispanic should be rounded up by ICE

 

[Zincwarrior]

So anyone who looks Hispanic should be rounded up by ICE

Takes that "Driving While Black" to a whole other level.

 

[Winston]

From the SCOTUS filing,

Based on the latest census and Office of Homeland Security Statistics data, the government estimates that at least 15 million illegal aliens—and likely several million more—are unlawfully present in the United States.! Millions of them crossed into the country illegally within the last four years. From 2021 to 2024, federal agents encountered some 9 million illegal aliens along the border; many others illegally entered after evading detection entirely. See Office of Homeland Sec. Statistics, Dep't of Homeland Sec., Immigration Enforcement and Legal Processes Monthly Tables(Jan. 16, 2025), https://ohss.dhs.govitopics/fimmigration/immigration-enforcement/monthly-tables. By current estimates, some 12.8 million aliens entered the country illegally during the previous administration.

Who the **** writes these things. So, we got 15 million illegal aliens in the United States, maybe "several" millions more. MAYBE. And almost 13 million entered into the US during the Biden Administration? Seriously?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's one way to send the vermin back

 

[Winston]

Damn, these guys really are idiots. Again, from the filing.

And they can detain individuals for questioning consistent with the Fourth Amendment based on “reasonable suspicion” of illegal presence in the United States,as this Court held in United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 884 (1975);
US v. Brignoni-Pence? Are you kidding me. They shoot themselves in the foot here. From US v. Brignni-Pence, 1975.

They pursued respondent's car and stopped it, saying later that their only reason for doing so was that its three occupants appeared to be of Mexican descent. The officers questioned respondent and his two passengers about their citizenship and learned that the passengers were aliens who had entered the country illegally. All three were then arrested, and respondent was charged with two counts of knowingly transporting illegal immigrants, a violation of § 274(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat. 228, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2). At trial, respondent moved to suppress the testimony of and about the two passengers, claiming that this evidence was the fruit of an illegal seizure. The trial court denied the motion, the aliens testified at trial, and respondent was convicted on both counts.


Respondent's appeal was pending in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when we announced our decision in Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, supra, holding that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use of roving patrols to search vehicles, without a warrant or probable cause, at points removed from the border and its functional equivalents. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, held that the stop in this case more closely resembled a roving patrol stop than a stop at a traffic checkpoint, and applied the principles of Almeida-Sanchez. [Footnote 1]

The court held that the Fourth Amendment, as interpreted in Almeida-Sanchez, forbids stopping a vehicle, even for the limited purpose of questioning its occupants, unless the officers have a "founded suspicion" that the occupants are aliens illegally in the country. The court refused to find that Mexican ancestry alone supported such a "founded suspicion," and held that respondent's motion to suppress should have been granted.

--snip--

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is


Affirmed.

 

[scruffy]

You can blame Biden for the situation that made this necessary.

 

[Scoutster]

LOL

If they run they are an illegal....If they stand still they are a well disciplined illegal.

 

[Meathead]

So anyone who looks Hispanic should be rounded up by ICE

You think all Hispanics look alike?

 

[rightwinger]

You think all Hispanics look alike?

Evidently, ICE does

 

[rightwinger]

You can blame Biden for the situation that made this necessary.

No, I blame Trump for his hatred of brown people

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You think all Hispanics look alike?

The left thought Zimmerman was a white Hispanic roflmao. Bunch of dopes