Anonymous #1 1w

“Supreme Court halts an injunction that had prevented immigration agents from racially profiling Latinos in central California. Sotomayor, dissenting, says the decision is "unconscionably irreconcilable with our nation's constitutional guarantees."

51

Anonymous #2 1w

It’s more “official” now

22

Anonymous #4 1w

Bro its less official now. You understand how it was in 1776 right?

7

Anonymous #2 1w

Before today, the 14th amendment meant more. The civil rights act meant more. A lot more stuff meant more.

36

Anonymous #4 1w

Chill out

-15

Anonymous #3 1w

ICE can racially profile Latinos at will now. Yes they did.

31

Anonymous OP 1w

Based

-17

Anonymous #5 1w

I love that you fascists finally admit to hating the constitution 🫶🏼

43

Anonymous bluecanoe 1w

KRISTI NOEM, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, ET AL. v. PEDRO VASQUEZ PERDOMO, ET AL.

14

Anonymous #3 1w

#3 is right. First of all it was some temporary ruling on a lower court stay. Second of all what the supreme court decides based on very very complicated and arcane legal arguments is whether the president, any president, has the legal authority to issue that kind of ruling. It really has nothing to do with the justices' personal opinions on immigration, at least in theory.

-4

Anonymous #8 1w

Whether the president has the authority to issue that kind of directive*

-2

Anonymous #8 1w

temporary order regarding a lower court stay or action

-1

Anonymous #8 1w

The plaintiffs: ICE cannot racially profile without probable cause. SCOTUS: Yes they can. But we won’t tell anyone why. #3 is wrong

14

Anonymous OP 1w

It's like affirmative action but for cops

6

Anonymous #9 1w

Funny you should mention that because this SCOTUS literally gave us Raced based admissions for college: 🤬 Violate the 4th amendment with racial profiling: 🤭

6

Anonymous #10 1w

Than the constitution? Okay 🥾 👅

13

Anonymous OP 1w

The constitution doesn’t guarantee the right of anyone to just come here and take advantage of our country

-7

Anonymous #10 1w

It guarantees things like due process

14

Anonymous #10 1w

You just said it’s more important to deport undocumented migrants than it is to protect the 4th amendment rights guaranteed to US born citizens. 🥾 👅

4

Anonymous OP 1w

Yes, those illegal immigrants don’t care about the constitution

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

You really can't square that circle, but they will try 😭

10

Anonymous OP 1w

Bro 😂 you’re hysterical

0

Anonymous #8 1w

So scotus said rhw president has the authority to be racist. No he doesn’t.

2

Anonymous #2 1w

Did you happen to time travel from 1776 to right now? Can’t believe I have to remind you of this but 20 years ago the government wasn’t this officially racist 😅

5

Anonymous #11 1w

Trust us, we’ve been waiting for the Twinkie to keel over since he was sworn in 💀 he’s no president of mine at this point

4

Anonymous #10 1w

Reading comprehension is -10…. You do realize you just supported the recent steps the government has made to literally revoke American citizens rights? Like step away from the deportations and look at the changes made and how they can affect you, and you MIGHT just realize the scope of all of this finally…

2

Anonymous #8 1w

This specific example isn’t even that fucking complicated 🤣 like we’ve been to this exact situation multiple times throughout our history now, and people are STILL saying “oh but precedents don’t matter and this is all complicated I’m sure they’re doing the right thing” SCOTUS explicitly said ICE can profile based on race, it’s really that simple lmao and if I have to explain why that’s a step backwards in rights, you deserve to be gaslighted and lied to by these fascists

4

Anonymous #3 1w

“Chill out” - guy whose great grandparents had “house hands”

2

Anonymous #7 1w

Lmao no they didn’t. SCOTUS has effectively allowed ICE to use race as one factor among others, which they have consistently ruled is permissible for decades. See U.S. v. Brignoni Pierce (1975), INS v. Delgado (1984), U.S. v. Cortez (1981), and U.S. v. Arvizu (2002). It’s not a universal right to come into this country. What other rational factors would you suggest? How is race and language spoken not heavily linked to one’s place of origin, and how is that not relevant to the migrant crisis?

0

Anonymous #15 1w

This isn’t something uniquely morally outrageous about the current justices on the Court. Ultimately under the rubric of the people in here crying about “discrimination” the only way to manage immigration is to just allow it to happen. Maybe to give amnesty to all of them like Ronald Reagan did late in his presidency? Let’s just let all of them in!

1

Anonymous #15 1w

Nobody’s claiming it’s a universal right other than conservatives looking to put words in the lefts mouth. We want the actual criminals to face the law just as much as you do, we just want them to have their right to a fair trial respected among other basic human rights. That and pulling the rug out from asylum seekers feet, anti science propaganda, authoritarian actions, this is all a human rights infamy happening right before our eyes

1

Anonymous #12 1w

The government was officially this racist. Just because its not on the news for white people to watch with popcorn doesn’t mean it didn’t exist. 20 years ago, Latinos were still getting deported and profiled based on race, black Americans were living in conditions 3x worse than whites and criminalized way worse, and Arabs and Muslims were public enemy #1. Just because its wasn’t mainstream for white peoples to watch with hotdogs and sprite, it doesn’t mean it didn’t exist. And it always have…

3

Anonymous #2 1w

Racial profiling (considering someone’s race is relevant to their legal status/criminal intent/criminal history) is immoral but prevalent in the US and for a long time yes, SYSTEMATIC racial profiling (using government resources and policies to push ASSUMPTIONS on guilt/intent/legal status based on race) is leagues worse and distinctly different. Has it been going on for a long time, yes, but not as bad as right now lmao

1

Anonymous #12 1w

And with that what’s the point in comparing how bad it was with how bad it is? The situations were different and can’t be compared 1:1, we’re regressing as a culture in the present and the entire purpose of society is to IMPROVE

1

Anonymous #12 1w

Understood — though, do I define criminality using the same parameters? I agree with all you say about due process, but people don’t have “rights” to anything. They aren’t natural rights either; I could wander out into the forest and nature could well deprive me of the right to life that it gave me. The government’s primary duty is to protect the polity. Therefore it should be protecting the interests of born and naturalized American citizens first and foremost.

1

Anonymous #15 1w

There very much are basic human rights as defined by the majority of countries around the entire world, and specifically for the US we require all people who are in the US to have the right to a fair trial among other basics in the case that one of these suspected criminals isn’t actually a criminal. It all comes down to innocent until proven guilty, which is being ignored in way too many cases

1

Anonymous #12 1w

We are not “regressing” as a culture. The world doesn’t revolve around white people, believe it or not. Just because whites have harder lives than their ancestors and hate their boomers, it doesn’t mean everyone else does. 2025 America is the best America for me because America has always been statically dogshit for us. And my grandparents and parents would kill to enjoy the things I have. My grandparents couldn’t even attend the school I just finished.

1

Anonymous #12 1w

Oh yes, I understand human rights are recognized by governments the world over. But they are anything but universal, and certainly not of natural or metaphysical (i.e. God given) origin. Illegal immigrants’ right to due process is not violated if ICE considers race as one of many factors when deciding whether to detain someone suspected of being in the country illegally.

1

Anonymous #2 1w

And that’s fine and dandy for you but not for everyone else. Plenty of other people are staring at a life of essentially indentured servitude for no fault of their own at a time when civilization is capable of so much better. And I should specify American culture is regressing, at least with the maga movement. It’s literally based on century old disproven philosophy and discrimination, denotatively regression.

1

Anonymous #12 1w

It’s not as though ICE is the final arbiter of justice for immigration

1

Anonymous #15 1w

It has been recently though and that’s the problem. The immigration courts have been in trumps pocket, saying “out” with every single person out in front of them that doesn’t have immediate proof of residence. There hasn’t been investigations or actual trials for countless people being thrown out and we have no way of knowing if these were actual criminals or not. Hence my “innocence until proven guilty isn’t being respected” point

1