this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2025
592 points (99.5% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3286 readers
900 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No memes.

Post news related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 3 points 20 hours ago

I'd be fine with that. After all, as per SCOTUS it's currently legal for presidents to do just about anything they want and be legally immune from prosecution. I assume this includes dropping traitor judges into black sites. Maybe the new SCOTUS won't make stupid rulings like giving presidents the power of monarchs, and some reasonable laws can be (re-)enacted.