Supreme Court removes ruling preventing targeted ICE stops

On Sept. 8, the Supreme Court stayed an injunction that permitted U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to conduct targeted immigration stops — particularly towards Hispanic and Latino people.

The stay, outlined in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo, allows ICE officers to stop and detain individuals based on “reasonable suspicion.” Factors that are admissible for ICE stops include locations such as bus stops, agricultural work sites and car washes. Other factors that are included are apparent race or ethnicity, language or speaking English with an accent.

The decision was made with a 6-3 conservative majority vote. 

The case began in June 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. It was then sent to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and ultimately reached the Supreme Court. The stay is not a final ruling on the policy.

If the Supreme Court rules the policy is constitutional, ICE will be permitted to conduct stops and detain people based on presumed immigration status.

The elimination of the restraining order has upset many, including government officials, according to the Associated Press.

The Northern Light interviewed legal studies professor Amy Doogan about the case.

Doogan spoke on the rulings’ constitutionality, “The constitution is a living document and is always subject to interpretation and reinterpretation … something is or isn’t constitutional based on whether the Supreme Court says it is or isn’t constitutional.”

She added, “They are perfectly capable of completely changing precedent. They have done it before, and they will do it again.”