Sotomayor publicly critiques Kavanaugh's grasp of immigration stops

Justice Sonia Sotomayor publicly criticized colleague Brett Kavanaugh's understanding of immigration detentions during a speech at the University of Kansas. She highlighted his privileged background in relation to his opinion allowing stops based partly on apparent ethnicity. The remarks come amid a new lawsuit challenging such practices.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor took aim at Justice Brett Kavanaugh's opinion in a Supreme Court case that permitted immigration agents to consider a person's 'apparent ethnicity' during stops. Critics have dubbed these 'Kavanaugh stops.' Speaking at an event on Tuesday at the University of Kansas, Sotomayor reflected on Kavanaugh's concurrence, stating: 'I had a colleague in that case who wrote, you know, these are only temporary stops. This is from a man whose parents were professionals. And probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.' She added that such detentions impact hourly workers harshly, noting: 'Those hours that they took you away, nobody’s paying that person. And that makes a difference between a meal for him and his kids that night and maybe just cold supper.' Sotomayor emphasized her dissent aimed to show Kavanaugh was breaking precedent, not just as a personal grievance. A new class-action lawsuit filed this week in New York targets Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection for detaining people 'based solely on their perceived Latino ethnicity.' Plaintiffs describe traumatic incidents, such as unmarked vehicles pulling over lawful residents. The suit seeks a statewide injunction against racial profiling in immigration enforcement. Kavanaugh's earlier 6-3 majority support contrasted with a later footnote in Trump v. Illinois, where he said stops must be 'brief' and 'based on reasonable suspicion of illegal presence,' not 'race or ethnicity.' Sotomayor's comments have sparked discussion on Supreme Court collegiality, with some viewing them as a breach of protocol.

Liittyvät artikkelit

Federal judge in Massachusetts courtroom striking down DHS deportation policy with gavel on ruling document, symbolizing due process victory.
AI:n luoma kuva

Federal judge in Massachusetts strikes down DHS guidance on third-country deportations, citing due process violations

Raportoinut AI AI:n luoma kuva Faktatarkistettu

U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy issued an 81-page opinion in late February 2026 setting aside the Trump administration’s guidance for deporting immigrants to “third countries” without meaningful notice and an opportunity to object, concluding the policy violates due process protections and undermines challenges under U.S. and international anti-torture safeguards.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented in a case involving a Vermont state police sergeant's use of force against a nonviolent protester, warning that the majority granted officers a 'license to inflict gratuitous pain.' The decision reversed a lower court's ruling denying qualified immunity to Sgt. Jacob Zorn. Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued the action violated the Fourth Amendment.

Raportoinut AI

The Department of Justice failed to secure a stay of a lower court order blocking its policy requiring advance notice for visits to immigration detention facilities. The unanimous ruling from the D.C. Circuit came on Friday after judges found the government had not demonstrated sufficient harm from unannounced congressional oversight. U.S. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, in a concurring opinion, agreed that the administration fell short despite her view that the government is likely to prevail on appeal.

A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump’s proclamation describing migration at the U.S.-Mexico border as an “invasion” and using that finding to suspend access to asylum exceeds the authority Congress granted in immigration law. The decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit could require the government to restart at-the-border asylum processing, though the administration has indicated it plans to seek further review.

Raportoinut AI

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 30, 2026, in Trump v. Barbara, challenging President Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas. As previously covered, the order—issued January 20, 2025—interprets the 14th Amendment as not granting automatic citizenship in these cases. A ruling, expected in coming months, could impact hundreds of thousands of children born after February 20, 2025.

Tämä verkkosivusto käyttää evästeitä

Käytämme evästeitä analyysiä varten parantaaksemme sivustoamme. Lue tietosuojakäytäntömme tietosuojakäytäntö lisätietoja varten.
Hylkää