The Supreme Court’s ruling in Mullin v. Doe, delivered this month, has placed 350,000 Haitians and 6,100 Syrians at immediate risk of deportation, effectively sanctioning policies rooted in racial animus and solidifying the state's power to control and expel segments of the working class. The decision suggests that evidence of racial animus against Black people may not be enough to persuade a majority of justices that racial discrimination has occurred. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated that “none of the cited statements by either the President or the Secretary was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications.” Alito further asserted, “One may oppose TPS and favor tighter restrictions on immigration for economic or other reasons that have nothing to do with race.”
The State's Legal Shield
The Trump administration had previously made no secret of its desire to purge the United States of nonwhite immigrants. Donald Trump had publicly declared, “If you import The Third World, you become The Third World,” and asserted that immigrants had “bad genes,” were genetically predisposed to crime, and were “poisoning the blood of our country” while coming “from Africa, from Asia, all over the world.” Trump also characterized allowing in Haitian immigrants as a “death wish for our country,” claiming “they all have AIDS,” accusing them of eating household pets, and referring to Haiti as a “filthy, dirty, disgusting” place and a “shithole” country. He complained that America does not take in enough people from Norway and Sweden. The administration had implemented what it called a whites-only refugee policy, accepting solely South Africans of European descent. Much of this evidence, including statements by Kristi Noem, the former head of the Department of Homeland Security, was presented to the Supreme Court.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent that “The evidence is there, plain to see, in the President’s statements, which the majority (and for that matter, his own lawyers) cannot even bear to repeat.” Shortly after the decision, White House adviser Stephen Miller stated, “We can finally remove these Haitian illegal migrants.” Guy-Uriel Charles, a professor at Harvard Law, noted that Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion “basically sets up an impossible burden for plaintiffs because race is rarely going to be the sole justification” for a policy. Aderson Francois, a law professor at Georgetown University, added that “As long as there is a plausible basis—any plausible articulable basis—for the government’s action, then the Court will look to that basis as sufficient,” even in the face of evidence that government actors were motivated by animus. Melissa Murray, a law professor at NYU, observed, “This Court sees race when it wants to, and blinds itself to racism in most other cases.”
The Roberts Court has consistently undermined anti-discrimination law for years. In May, one month ago, in Louisiana v. Callais, the Court determined that not allowing Louisiana’s government to dilute Black votes was racist. Alito insisted that forcing the state to draw a second majority-Black congressional district would be an “unconstitutional racial gerrymander” because Republicans were entitled to discriminate against Black voters if they argued that their purpose was partisan instead of racist. The Court reaffirmed this position in a subsequent case dealing with Alabama, despite a lower court finding ample evidence of deliberate racial discrimination. In a 2009 case on affirmative action, Ricci v. DeStefano, 17 years ago, Alito dismissed as “pretextual” New Haven’s reasoning for throwing out test results where white firefighters performed better than their Black colleagues. When a Virginia school implemented a race-neutral, class-based affirmative-action policy, Alito insisted the policy was by definition racist because it changed the demographic composition of the student body.
Expanding the Imperial Garrison
President Donald Trump announced on Saturday the nomination of Lance Schroyer, a former Oklahoma state trooper, as the next director of Immigration and Customs and Enforcement (ICE). Trump praised Schroyer on his Truth Social platform as a former U.S. Marine and a “PATRIOT with real operational experience,” calling him a “proven leader with DECADES of experience locking up the worst of the worst.” Schroyer hails from the same home state as the new Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, who started in his role four months ago. Earlier this month, Mullin brought Schroyer onstage at a National Sheriffs’ Association event, calling him a “good friend of mine” and noting DHS had recently hired him. On Saturday, Mullin praised Schroyer, highlighting his 29-year career and work with federal and state partners on U.S. immigration enforcement. Mullin stated, “President Trump made a great pick, and I’m confident Lance’s strong leadership and firsthand experience will empower the men and women of ICE to deport criminal illegal aliens, secure the homeland, and protect the American people.”
Schroyer’s nomination follows the resignation of former ICE director Todd Lyons at the end of May, less than one month ago. David Venturella, a former executive at a private prison operator, has been serving as the acting head of the agency and is expected to continue until Schroyer is Senate confirmed, according to a DHS official. ICE has not had a Senate-confirmed director since the Obama administration. Claire Trickler-McNulty, a former senior ICE official, noted that prior confirmed ICE directors have often been attorneys, though some state and local law enforcement officials have also been nominated, suggesting Markwayne Mullin likely had influence over Schroyer’s selection. John Torres, another senior ICE official, indicated Schroyer faces an uphill climb toward Senate confirmation, but his state and local experience might help.
The Cost of Enforcement
If confirmed, Schroyer will lead ICE as the agency undergoes massive growth, fueled by a one-time injection of $75 billion last year. This funding has allowed for the hiring of 12,000 officers and increased detention capacity. Trump returned to the White House on a promise of mass deportations, with ICE serving as a central executor of that vision. Mullin has promised to keep his department out of the headlines and indicated a softer tone on immigration, yet he is expected to align with the president’s priorities on mass deportations. The public mood has soured on Trump’s immigration crackdown, which sent surges of federal immigration officers into American cities to round up immigrants. These raids escalated tensions and prompted clashes between protesters and law enforcement, leading to the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis earlier this year.