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.

  • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    The “Bill of Rights” is just a fancy name for the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. As such, they are inherently a binding part of the Constitution. No other amendment is required to make them valid.

    • hector@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Until around the Civil War the Bill of Rights only applied to States and not the federal government. It was not an issue before that because the federal government was not up in everybody’s business either. They are only authorized to regulate interstate commerce in the us, and forbidden from inhibiting the free movements of people and goods in between the states.