{"id":17134,"date":"2026-03-12T14:40:58","date_gmt":"2026-03-12T14:40:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134"},"modified":"2026-03-12T14:40:58","modified_gmt":"2026-03-12T14:40:58","slug":"the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-allowed-the-donald-trump-administration-to-resume-sweeping-immigration-enforcement-sweeps-in-los-angeles-by-a-6-3-vote-the-court-lifted-restrictions-th","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134","title":{"rendered":"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it"},"content":{"rendered":"

The <\/span>Supreme <\/span>Court <\/span>delivered <\/span>a <\/span>major <\/span>legal <\/span>victory <\/span>for <\/span>former <\/span>President <\/span>Donald <\/span>Trump\u2019s <\/span>immigration <\/span>policies <\/span>by <\/span>ruling <\/span>in <\/span>favor <\/span>of <\/span>U.<\/span>S. <\/span>Immigration <\/span>and <\/span>Customs <\/span>Enforcement (<\/span>ICE), <\/span>allowing <\/span>the <\/span>agency <\/span>to <\/span>resume <\/span>operations <\/span>previously <\/span>blocked <\/span>by <\/span>lower <\/span>courts. <\/span>The <\/span>decision <\/span>lifts <\/span>an <\/span>injunction <\/span>that <\/span>had <\/span>restricted <\/span>ICE\u2019s <\/span>ability <\/span>to <\/span>conduct <\/span>certain <\/span>enforcement <\/span>actions <\/span>in <\/span>Los <\/span>Angeles, <\/span>a <\/span>city <\/span>with <\/span>one <\/span>of <\/span>the <\/span>highest <\/span>populations <\/span>of <\/span>undocumented <\/span>immigrants <\/span>in <\/span>the <\/span>country. <\/span>For <\/span>advocates <\/span>of <\/span>stricter <\/span>immigration <\/span>enforcement, <\/span>the <\/span>ruling <\/span>is <\/span>seen <\/span>as <\/span>a <\/span>validation <\/span>of <\/span>the <\/span>administration\u2019s <\/span>approach, <\/span>while <\/span>critics <\/span>warn <\/span>it <\/span>could <\/span>lead <\/span>to <\/span>increased <\/span>detentions <\/span>and <\/span>heightened <\/span>tensions <\/span>within <\/span>immigrant <\/span>communities. <\/span>The <\/span>case <\/span>highlights <\/span>the <\/span>ongoing <\/span>legal <\/span>and <\/span>political <\/span>battles <\/span>surrounding <\/span>federal <\/span>immigration <\/span>authority, <\/span>particularly <\/span>in <\/span>cities <\/span>that <\/span>have <\/span>declared <\/span>themselves <\/span>as <\/span>sanctuary <\/span>jurisdictions, <\/span>and <\/span>underscores <\/span>the <\/span>Supreme <\/span>Court\u2019s <\/span>role <\/span>in <\/span>defining <\/span>the <\/span>boundaries <\/span>of <\/span>executive <\/span>power.<\/span><\/p>\n

Central <\/span>to <\/span>the <\/span>case <\/span>was <\/span>the <\/span>question <\/span>of <\/span>whether <\/span>ICE <\/span>agents <\/span>could <\/span>consider <\/span>factors <\/span>such <\/span>as <\/span>race, <\/span>ethnicity, <\/span>language, <\/span>or <\/span>location <\/span>when <\/span>questioning <\/span>individuals <\/span>about <\/span>their <\/span>immigration <\/span>status. <\/span>Justice <\/span>Brett <\/span>M. <\/span>Kavanaugh, <\/span>writing <\/span>for <\/span>the <\/span>majority, <\/span>clarified <\/span>that <\/span>while <\/span>ethnicity <\/span>alone <\/span>cannot <\/span>justify <\/span>enforcement <\/span>action, <\/span>it <\/span>may <\/span>be <\/span>taken <\/span>into <\/span>account <\/span>alongside <\/span>other <\/span>indicators <\/span>if <\/span>it <\/span>contributes <\/span>to <\/span>establishing <\/span>reasonable <\/span>suspicion. <\/span>The <\/span>opinion <\/span>emphasized <\/span>that <\/span>enforcement <\/span>officers <\/span>must <\/span>use <\/span>a <\/span>combination <\/span>of <\/span>factors <\/span>rather <\/span>than <\/span>relying <\/span>solely <\/span>on <\/span>race <\/span>or <\/span>ethnicity, <\/span>reflecting <\/span>the <\/span>Court\u2019s <\/span>attempt <\/span>to <\/span>balance <\/span>civil <\/span>liberties <\/span>with <\/span>the <\/span>practical <\/span>needs <\/span>of <\/span>law <\/span>enforcement. <\/span>Legal <\/span>scholars <\/span>note <\/span>that <\/span>this <\/span>ruling <\/span>sets <\/span>a <\/span>precedent <\/span>for <\/span>how <\/span>officers <\/span>interpret \u201c<\/span>reasonable <\/span>suspicion\u201d <\/span>in <\/span>immigration <\/span>enforcement, <\/span>potentially <\/span>influencing <\/span>similar <\/span>cases <\/span>nationwide <\/span>and <\/span>affecting <\/span>the <\/span>daily <\/span>operations <\/span>of <\/span>ICE <\/span>in <\/span>densely <\/span>populated <\/span>areas.<\/span><\/p>\n

The <\/span>Trump <\/span>administration <\/span>had <\/span>challenged <\/span>lower <\/span>court <\/span>rulings <\/span>that <\/span>had <\/span>previously <\/span>limited <\/span>ICE\u2019s <\/span>operational <\/span>scope. <\/span>Those <\/span>rulings <\/span>were <\/span>particularly <\/span>critical <\/span>of <\/span>practices <\/span>in <\/span>Los <\/span>Angeles, <\/span>where <\/span>federal <\/span>authorities <\/span>had <\/span>stepped <\/span>up <\/span>enforcement <\/span>efforts <\/span>to <\/span>locate <\/span>and <\/span>detain <\/span>undocumented <\/span>individuals. <\/span>The <\/span>Supreme <\/span>Court\u2019s <\/span>reversal <\/span>effectively <\/span>grants <\/span>ICE <\/span>greater <\/span>discretion <\/span>in <\/span>how <\/span>it <\/span>conducts <\/span>its <\/span>operations, <\/span>particularly <\/span>in <\/span>urban <\/span>environments <\/span>where <\/span>undocumented <\/span>populations <\/span>are <\/span>concentrated. <\/span>Advocates <\/span>for <\/span>the <\/span>administration <\/span>argued <\/span>that <\/span>the <\/span>injunction <\/span>had <\/span>created <\/span>confusion <\/span>among <\/span>enforcement <\/span>officers, <\/span>hampering <\/span>their <\/span>ability <\/span>to <\/span>carry <\/span>out <\/span>federal <\/span>mandates <\/span>efficiently. <\/span>By <\/span>restoring <\/span>ICE\u2019s <\/span>authority, <\/span>the <\/span>Court\u2019s <\/span>ruling <\/span>signals <\/span>support <\/span>for <\/span>a <\/span>broader <\/span>interpretation <\/span>of <\/span>federal <\/span>power <\/span>in <\/span>immigration <\/span>matters, <\/span>reinforcing <\/span>the <\/span>executive <\/span>branch\u2019s <\/span>discretion <\/span>in <\/span>implementing <\/span>national <\/span>policy.<\/span><\/p>\n

Federal <\/span>authorities <\/span>had <\/span>significantly <\/span>increased <\/span>their <\/span>presence <\/span>in <\/span>Los <\/span>Angeles <\/span>starting <\/span>in <\/span>early <\/span>June, <\/span>citing <\/span>the <\/span>need <\/span>to <\/span>enforce <\/span>immigration <\/span>laws <\/span>more <\/span>effectively. <\/span>The <\/span>escalated <\/span>operations <\/span>prompted <\/span>public <\/span>protests, <\/span>drawing <\/span>attention <\/span>to <\/span>tensions <\/span>between <\/span>federal <\/span>enforcement <\/span>and <\/span>local <\/span>authorities, <\/span>particularly <\/span>in <\/span>sanctuary <\/span>cities <\/span>that <\/span>prioritize <\/span>protecting <\/span>undocumented <\/span>residents. <\/span>In <\/span>response, <\/span>the <\/span>federal <\/span>government <\/span>deployed <\/span>additional <\/span>resources, <\/span>including <\/span>specialized <\/span>personnel <\/span>and <\/span>technology <\/span>to <\/span>aid <\/span>ICE <\/span>operations. <\/span>These <\/span>actions <\/span>fueled <\/span>legal <\/span>debates <\/span>over <\/span>the <\/span>appropriate <\/span>use <\/span>of <\/span>federal <\/span>force <\/span>within <\/span>domestic <\/span>jurisdictions, <\/span>highlighting <\/span>the <\/span>delicate <\/span>balance <\/span>between <\/span>national <\/span>security, <\/span>law <\/span>enforcement <\/span>authority, <\/span>and <\/span>civil <\/span>rights <\/span>protections. <\/span>Related <\/span>cases <\/span>challenging <\/span>these <\/span>actions <\/span>continue <\/span>to <\/span>move <\/span>through <\/span>the <\/span>judicial <\/span>system, <\/span>ensuring <\/span>that <\/span>the <\/span>legal <\/span>landscape <\/span>surrounding <\/span>immigration <\/span>enforcement <\/span>remains <\/span>fluid <\/span>and <\/span>contested.<\/span><\/p>\n

A <\/span>key <\/span>part <\/span>of <\/span>the <\/span>legal <\/span>dispute <\/span>originated <\/span>with <\/span>a <\/span>ruling <\/span>by <\/span>Judge <\/span>Maame <\/span>Frimpong, <\/span>who <\/span>found <\/span>that <\/span>ICE <\/span>had <\/span>relied <\/span>on <\/span>insufficient <\/span>grounds, <\/span>such <\/span>as <\/span>language <\/span>spoken <\/span>or <\/span>location, <\/span>when <\/span>stopping <\/span>individuals. <\/span>She <\/span>determined <\/span>that <\/span>these <\/span>practices <\/span>did <\/span>not <\/span>meet <\/span>constitutional <\/span>standards <\/span>for <\/span>reasonable <\/span>suspicion <\/span>under <\/span>the <\/span>Fourth <\/span>Amendment, <\/span>issuing <\/span>an <\/span>injunction <\/span>that <\/span>blocked <\/span>certain <\/span>types <\/span>of <\/span>arrests. <\/span>The <\/span>decision <\/span>reflected <\/span>long-<\/span>standing <\/span>concerns <\/span>about <\/span>potential <\/span>profiling <\/span>and <\/span>overreach <\/span>in <\/span>federal <\/span>immigration <\/span>enforcement, <\/span>particularly <\/span>in <\/span>diverse <\/span>urban <\/span>communities. <\/span>Critics <\/span>argued <\/span>that <\/span>ICE\u2019s <\/span>actions <\/span>disproportionately <\/span>targeted <\/span>minority <\/span>populations <\/span>and <\/span>violated <\/span>constitutional <\/span>protections, <\/span>while <\/span>supporters <\/span>claimed <\/span>that <\/span>clear <\/span>operational <\/span>guidance <\/span>was <\/span>necessary <\/span>to <\/span>prevent <\/span>ambiguity <\/span>in <\/span>law <\/span>enforcement <\/span>actions. <\/span>Judge <\/span>Frimpong\u2019s <\/span>ruling <\/span>and <\/span>the <\/span>subsequent <\/span>appellate <\/span>decisions <\/span>illustrate <\/span>the <\/span>complex <\/span>interplay <\/span>between <\/span>federal <\/span>authority <\/span>and <\/span>individual <\/span>rights <\/span>in <\/span>contemporary <\/span>immigration <\/span>law.<\/span><\/p>\n

The <\/span>9th <\/span>Circuit <\/span>had <\/span>upheld <\/span>Judge <\/span>Frimpong\u2019s <\/span>block, <\/span>criticizing <\/span>ICE <\/span>for <\/span>a <\/span>lack <\/span>of <\/span>transparency <\/span>and <\/span>guidance <\/span>in <\/span>its <\/span>enforcement <\/span>practices. <\/span>However, <\/span>the <\/span>Supreme <\/span>Court\u2019s <\/span>reversal <\/span>now <\/span>provides <\/span>the <\/span>agency <\/span>with <\/span>greater <\/span>operational <\/span>freedom, <\/span>allowing <\/span>officers <\/span>to <\/span>incorporate <\/span>multiple <\/span>factors <\/span>in <\/span>assessing <\/span>potential <\/span>enforcement <\/span>actions <\/span>while <\/span>still <\/span>adhering <\/span>to <\/span>constitutional <\/span>standards. <\/span>The <\/span>administration <\/span>argued <\/span>that <\/span>precise <\/span>guidance <\/span>is <\/span>essential <\/span>to <\/span>avoid <\/span>confusion, <\/span>ensure <\/span>consistent <\/span>application <\/span>of <\/span>federal <\/span>law, <\/span>and <\/span>maintain <\/span>public <\/span>safety. <\/span>While <\/span>opponents <\/span>warn <\/span>that <\/span>the <\/span>decision <\/span>could <\/span>exacerbate <\/span>tensions <\/span>in <\/span>immigrant <\/span>communities <\/span>and <\/span>increase <\/span>the <\/span>risk <\/span>of <\/span>civil <\/span>rights <\/span>violations, <\/span>proponents <\/span>maintain <\/span>that <\/span>it <\/span>strengthens <\/span>the <\/span>federal <\/span>government\u2019s <\/span>ability <\/span>to <\/span>enforce <\/span>immigration <\/span>laws <\/span>uniformly <\/span>across <\/span>jurisdictions. <\/span>The <\/span>ruling <\/span>not <\/span>only <\/span>reshapes <\/span>the <\/span>operational <\/span>landscape <\/span>for <\/span>ICE <\/span>but <\/span>also <\/span>sets <\/span>a <\/span>significant <\/span>precedent <\/span>for <\/span>how <\/span>courts <\/span>balance <\/span>executive <\/span>authority, <\/span>civil <\/span>liberties, <\/span>and <\/span>local <\/span>autonomy <\/span>in <\/span>matters <\/span>of <\/span>immigration <\/span>enforcement, <\/span>leaving <\/span>lasting <\/span>implications <\/span>for <\/span>the <\/span>future <\/span>of <\/span>federal <\/span>policy <\/span>and <\/span>urban <\/span>law <\/span>enforcement <\/span>nationwide.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court delivered a major legal victory for former President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration policies by ruling in favor of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), allowing… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17135,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17134","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Supreme Court delivered a major legal victory for former President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration policies by ruling in favor of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), allowing...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"EVERYONESDIARY\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-03-12T14:40:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"519\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"SKADMIN\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"SKADMIN\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134\",\"name\":\"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-12T14:40:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5aa98651ebb3605c3878cb97a1f86549\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg\",\"width\":590,\"height\":519},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/\",\"name\":\"EVERYONESDIARY\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5aa98651ebb3605c3878cb97a1f86549\",\"name\":\"SKADMIN\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f690f76875b143aa7d6735e3a2c5ccdc4b6231f0b9a56764509f081adb3b845?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f690f76875b143aa7d6735e3a2c5ccdc4b6231f0b9a56764509f081adb3b845?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"SKADMIN\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?author=2\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY","og_description":"The Supreme Court delivered a major legal victory for former President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration policies by ruling in favor of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), allowing...","og_url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134","og_site_name":"EVERYONESDIARY","article_published_time":"2026-03-12T14:40:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":590,"height":519,"url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"SKADMIN","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"SKADMIN","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134","url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134","name":"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it - EVERYONESDIARY","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg","datePublished":"2026-03-12T14:40:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5aa98651ebb3605c3878cb97a1f86549"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/649287148_1263111185958839_3989968468157001820_n.jpg","width":590,"height":519},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?p=17134#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Supreme Court of the United States allowed the Donald Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles. By a 6\u20133 vote, the Court lifted restrictions that had barred federal agents from stopping people in LA based on appearance, language, or job. Critics warn the decision could permit racial profiling and weaken constitutional protections, while supporters call it"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/","name":"EVERYONESDIARY","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5aa98651ebb3605c3878cb97a1f86549","name":"SKADMIN","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f690f76875b143aa7d6735e3a2c5ccdc4b6231f0b9a56764509f081adb3b845?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4f690f76875b143aa7d6735e3a2c5ccdc4b6231f0b9a56764509f081adb3b845?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"SKADMIN"},"url":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/?author=2"}]}},"brizy_media":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17134","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17134"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17134\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17136,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17134\/revisions\/17136"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17135"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17134"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17134"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/everyonesdiary.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17134"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}