In a 6-3 emergency decision, the Court stays a lower-court injunction, allowing federal agents to resume “roving patrols” in Southern California.
The Supreme Court on Monday granted an emergency request from the Department of Justice, lifting a temporary restraining order that had placed significant restrictions on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area. The 6-3 decision allows ICE agents to immediately resume enforcement patrols that were halted by a federal judge who found a “mountain of evidence” of Fourth Amendment violations.
The ruling is a major victory for the administration, which had argued that the lower court’s injunction unconstitutionally hampered federal agents’ ability to enforce immigration laws. Solicitor General D. John Sauer contended the order was a “straitjacket” that interfered with law enforcement efforts in a region the administration considers a top priority for immigration enforcement.
READ: Axios Ignites Firestorm By Framing Brutal North Carolina Murder As “MAGA Crime Message”
“Another massive victory at the Supreme Court from the Justice Department attorneys, this time defending ICE,” said US Attorney General Pam Bondi. “In a 6-3 decision, the Court stayed an injunction that attempted to hamper ICE operations across the Los Angeles area. Now, ICE can continue carrying out roving patrols in California without judicial micromanagement. We will continue fighting and winning for @POTUS’ agenda in court.”
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority sided with this view, issuing an unsigned order that stayed the injunction pending review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The initial injunction, issued in July 2025 by U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, had barred ICE agents from stopping individuals based on factors such as their race, language, or location alone. The judge’s order came in response to a lawsuit from civil rights and immigrant advocacy groups, who cited cases of U.S. citizens and legal residents being caught up in aggressive enforcement actions.
READ: President Trump’s “Apocalypse Now” Parody Post Has Democrats In A Tizzy
The Supreme Court’s decision, however, has been met with sharp criticism. The court’s three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor issuing a strong rebuke of the majority’s action.
“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,” Sotomayor wrote, warning that the decision could normalize racial profiling.
While the administration and its supporters frame the decision as a necessary step for law enforcement, emphasizing the “totality of the circumstances” for establishing reasonable suspicion, civil rights advocates fear the ruling will lead to more indiscriminate enforcement tactics.
READ: Sen. Alex Padilla Considers 2026 Gubernatorial Bid Amid Push From California Dems
The lawsuit challenging the ICE patrols will continue to proceed through the federal appeals process, but for now, the restrictions on “roving patrols” in Southern California have been lifted.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
