Thread by @BurnhamDC

Another emergency filing in the Supreme Court last night by @TheJusticeDept, this time because a district court has commandeered immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. There are multiple serious issues here, and emergency relief seems proper. 1/

To set the stage: ICE Agents need "reasonable suspicion" that a person is here illegally before they can stop the person for immigration-enforcement purposes. That is a low bar. Basically is it reasonable under the circumstances to suspect someone is an illegal alien? 2/

Here, the district court forbade ICE Agents working in greater Los Angeles from considering four extremely broad attributes in forming suspicions about potential illegal aliens. As @TheJusticeDept explains below. 3/

This is extraordinary on multiple levels. Here are three. First, the entire point of the "reasonable suspicion" rule is to give law enforcement agents discretion to make reasonable, practical, human judgments. District Courts don't get to micromanage these mental processes. 4/

Second, this order is a contempt trap. Under the injunction, practically every detainee can seek contempt, claiming the Agent violated the injunction by considering the detainee's ethnicity, by detaining the person "at a location where illegal aliens are known to gather," etc 5/

At best, the prospect of contempt proceedings before a hostile district judge will drastically chill enforcement. At worst, it will foment interbranch conflict. The Executive must follow court orders, but courts must not impose orders that are impossible to follow. 6/

Finally, we have another court imposing legislative rules on a large population in the guise of an injunction. The Supreme Court explained less than two months ago in Casa that courts can only provide relief to the actual plaintiffs--not random people who didn't sue (at least absent a class). 7/

Issuing an injunction to govern all immigration enforcement in greater Los Angeles is no more lawful than issuing one to govern enforcement nationwide. The principle is the same, and this is frankly basic stuff. Yet the lower courts continue to ignore it. 8/

Ample basis for the Supreme Court to intervene here.
The team of @AGPamBondi @DAGToddBlanche @ChadMizelle47 Stanley Woodward and John Sauer sum it up below. /fin

Here's a link to the filing: supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/2…