On Monday, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to use racial profiling in its militarized immigration raids across Los Angeles, halting an injunction that had barred officers from targeting Latinos based on ethnicity. The court did not explain the reason for its shadow docket order, which appeared to split 6–3 along ideological lines. In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the decision was “unconscionably irreconcilable with our nation’s constitutional guarantees,” opening the door to violent persecution of Latinos—including American citizens—by “masked agents with guns.” The majority did not respond to this extraordinary charge, perhaps because it is so obviously true.

  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The court did not explain the reason for its shadow docket order

    Cool that they can just do this.

    • philosloppy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      yeah, it turns out unelected, lifetime appointees with the power to interpret the law with no oversight was a bad idea.

      • Ascrod@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        59 minutes ago

        Technically, Congress can impeach supreme court justices, but that depends on Congress being functional, which it hasn’t been for a long time.

    • missfrizzle@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Kavanaugh did, in a concurrence. I strongly disagree with his Opinion but at least he put words to paper. the others didn’t, so I assume the conservatives are fighting about the legal basis for their ruling.

      they will have to eventually explain themselves at least, once this case makes it to the regular docket.