Words by Madeleine Farr PZ ’27, Graphic by Thea Riley PZ ’28

In early September, the Supreme Court lifted a lower court judge’s ruling on immigration raids in Los Angeles. While ICE agents, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and supporters argue that the SCOTUS decision was necessary to ensure agents could thoroughly carry out their duties, critics argue that it enables indiscriminate sweeps and racial profiling.

The Trump administration described ICE’s descent on Los Angeles earlier this summer as “the largest mass deportation operation in history.” Agents used what they call “reasonable suspicion” to target individuals based on a wide range of factors including work sites, speaking Spanish or accented English, and whether or not a person flees in response to seeing an ICE agent. 

Responding to what she argued were “unlawful” immigration raids, Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California prohibited the government from detaining or interrogating individuals based on the aforementioned factors. The decision was upheld by an appeals court. 

The Trump administration, in response, appealed to the Supreme Court. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion for the 6-3 decision that ultimately ruled in the federal government’s favor on Sept. 8. 

“What the district court tried to do is basically inhibit, paralyze our ability to do anything by saying we cannot consider work sites, we can’t consider language, we can’t consider a list of things,” Acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli said on FOX News when the SCOTUS decision was revealed. “What happens is agents are afraid to do their jobs, afraid they’ll be held in contempt of court.”

As a result of ICE conducting raids based on “reasonable suspicion,” many Latino and Hispanic Americans are beginning to carry their passport around whenever they leave the house — if they are still leaving the house. 

“I don’t think I’ve ever, as an immigration reporter, spoken to so many people who are hiding behind closed doors, who are just not going out,” Jasmine Garsd, NPR immigration correspondent, said in response to the decision. “They’ve been here for about 25 years, and they’re just not going out anymore. And they are going to self-deport, which is kind of, you know, one of the pillars of this administration’s policy.”

Despite the decision’s vast impact on the greater Los Angeles area, some Claremont students have said that open discussion about the ruling and its implications has been limited

“This decision made by SCOTUS has not been discussed or acknowledged in any classes, clubs, or organizations I’m a part of,” an anonymous Pitzer student said in a statement shared with the Outback. “It is really tragic to see the emotional well-being of our marginalized students being thrown to the side lines in times where it matters most,” they wrote. 

The majority in the ruling did not provide an explanation, meaning that it’s difficult to know whether its reasoning is limited to Los Angeles or can be applied nationwide. However, the Trump administration has explicitly targeted the area, claiming that illegal immigration levels here are especially high. 

The city isn’t the only target. The Inland Empire, widely considered part of the greater Los Angeles Area, has also felt the impact of the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration, according to Lennon Nuttall PZ ‘27.   

Nuttall has been working with the Pomona Economic Opportunity Center (PEOC), connected by a praxis class with Professor Melissa Chadburn last spring. She creates infographics and writes articles about citizenship for the organization, a non-profit which aims to connect day laborers with “safe work at a fair wage” and “improve overall conditions for all immigrant workers.” 

Nuttall shared with the Outback that when the ruling was released, she was preparing to meet with an individual in association with her work with the PEOC. 

“She told me a bunch of horrific stuff,” Nuttall said. “Like, over 100 people in the IE getting stolen. And there’s a lot in one day. And I was so sick and tired and, like, ready to punch everyone in the face and dropkick everyone’s baby.” 

The news about the SCOTUS ruling was quickly overshadowed by Charlie Kirk’s assassination, which was captured in graphic video. Kirk, a right-wing political activist, was shot fatally in the neck during an event at Utah Valley University. 

“It was really heartbreaking to see this news drowned out by the news of Charlie Kirk, a white right-wing political figure around the same time,” the same anonymous source wrote. “Although the community of students and staff at Pitzer College pride themselves on being uplifting allies of our community, there still are blatant choices made in which movements to support and uplift.”

The source also highlighted how students of color comprise a majority of student staff and run affinity organizations: “Students of Color are truly the backbone of Pitzer College …” they wrote. “However most of our stories go unheard.” 

The case’s outcome is not yet finalized; it is pending before a federal appeals court, and may end up at the Supreme Court once again.