“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.”
Read Justice Sotomayor’s dissent in Noam v Pedro Vasquez Perdomo >
Justice Sotomayor on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert
Watch This
Justice Sotomayor on why she so strongly disagrees with her colleagues.
Lawyers from all areas of the profession speak out against “shameful” SCOTUS decision
Speaking Of...
This week’s Noem v Perdomo has earned wide condemnation from very different kinds of lawyers.
Sherrilyn Ifill, former president of the NAACP, writes in her Substack newsletter that the conservative justices live in a fantasy world: “Indeed one wonders whether the conservative justices on the Court watch television channels where they might see what ICE raids really look like.”
Writing for Bloomberg, Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman—who has been criticized by activists for his previous SCOTUS takes—predicts this decision will be remembered with shame: “Today’s decision deserves to be remembered as particularly shameful. With any luck, it will someday be reversed, like other famous examples of Supreme Court decisions that reflected prejudice against African-Americans, Japanese-Americans, and others. Until then, it will stand as a marker of how low our current anti-immigrant panic has brought us.”
In rare interview, 12 federal judges criticize the Supreme Court
More Of This
A group of federal judges took the highly unusual step of airing out their frustration with the Supreme Court’s use of the shadow docket.
All 12 judges spoke anonymously because of the norm in the legal community to not publicly criticize the justices.
Some of their criticisms include:
Overturning their decisions without explanation;
Providing no guidance, specially when overturning precedent;
Validating the White House’s effort to undermine the lower courts.
