SCOTUS Backs ICE in LA Stops: A High-Stakes Clash Over Immigration Tactics & the Fourth Amendment

EDITORIAL

By Robert Phillips, Deputy District Attorney (Ret).

Detaining and Arresting Alleged Illegal Aliens  

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently rendered an opinion in a case that questions the current president’s (i.e., Donald Trump’s) administration’s practices and tactics used in stopping, detaining, questioning, and/or arresting (and eventually deporting) illegal aliens. (See Perdomo v. Noem (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2025) 2025 U.S.App. LEXIS 19503.)  Falling far short of reaching any ultimate conclusions, the Court in this decision did no more than uphold the lower (district) court’s conclusion, based upon the plaintiffs’ written allegations (and before any actual evidence is heard), that they are likely to succeed in proving after an evidentiary hearing that the described detentions and arrests of the various listed plaintiffs were not supported by either a reasonable suspicion or probable cause, respectively, to believe that they were in the country illegally or otherwise in violation of the law, as required by the Fourth Amendment.   

The circumstances behind this case were all alleged to have occurred as part of what has been entitled by the federal government as “Operation At Large,” as it is currently proceeding in Los Angeles. The civil defendants are listed as U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents along with officers from the Enforcement and Removal Operations Directorate of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, better known simply as “ICE.”  

This ruling out of the Ninth Circuit was immediately appealed to the United States Supreme Court.  The High Court was quick to respond, reversing the Ninth’s Circuit in Noem v. Perdomo (Sep. 8, 2025) __ U.S. __ [__ S.Ct. __; __ L.Ed.2nd __ [2025 U.S. LEXIS 2779], as discussed below.   

I am not fully briefing this case, however, because the only issue on appeal is whether ICE and Border Patrol’s activities in Los Angeles should be stayed (i.e., delayed) pending a final resolution via a full evidentiary hearing.  Also note, by the way, that it is not my intention to get into the politics of this issue, or anything related to it.  As hard as it might be for some to discuss what’s coming down almost ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.