>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
In this particular fight, U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong — appointed by Joe Biden — issued an injunction last week halting immigration arrests and stops across Southern California. She claimed there was a “mountain of evidence” showing that the administration’s tactics likely violated protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Trump administration is calling foul. In their Supreme Court appeal, government lawyers argued that Frimpong’s ruling is crippling the federal government’s ability to enforce immigration law and allowing dangerous criminals to remain on the streets.
Biden Judge Sides with Sanctuary Policies
The 9th Circuit sided with Frimpong, echoing her skepticism about the government’s claim that the stops were justified. Newsweek reported that government attorney Jacob Roth argued the judge’s order was “overly broad” and lacked proof that the administration’s enforcement practices were unconstitutional.
“Legally, I think it’s appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion,” Roth said, citing race, language, location, and occupation — factors listed in the temporary restraining order.
But top Trump officials are making it clear that activist judges are putting politics ahead of public safety.
“Unelected judges are undermining the will of the American people. President Trump and Secretary Noem are putting the American people first by removing illegal aliens who pose a threat to our communities,” said Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi doubled down. “Sanctuary policies impede law enforcement and put American citizens at risk by design,” she said. “The Department of Justice will continue bringing litigation against sanctuary jurisdictions and work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to eradicate these harmful policies around the country.”
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was equally blunt: “These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens.”
Supreme Court Showdown Coming in September
The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for September to consider a preliminary injunction that could block the lower court’s rulings and allow federal agents to resume immigration stops in the state.
The fight comes the same week the Supreme Court rejected several climate-change lawsuits targeting oil companies — a move applauded by conservatives. O.H. Skinner, executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, said such cases “seek to wipe products from store shelves and funnel money to left-wing causes.”
“Here is hoping the targets of these lawsuits continue to fight these cases, as they have consistently prevailed in the final stages of review, and that is the only way for consumers not to be sacrificed before the left-wing onslaught here,” Skinner said.
With California Democrats openly defying immigration laws and federal judges rushing to shield sanctuary cities, Trump’s latest Supreme Court appeal is shaping up to be one of the most consequential immigration battles of his presidency.
If the Court sides with the administration, it will be a major victory for law enforcement — and a stinging rebuke to the Left’s open-borders agenda.
