Reasonable Suspicion and the Fourth Amendment
The Fourth Amendment requires that immigration stops be supported by reasonable suspicion of unlawful presence. This standard is designed to protect individuals from arbitrary stops and requires law enforcement to rely on specific, articulable facts rather than generalized assumptions. In theory, this safeguard ensures that constitutional protections apply equally to everyone… In practice, as we see all the time, the Fourth Amendment does not protect individuals in every situation – immigration or just a routine traffic stop. How it interacts with immigration directly connected to the Fourth’s application in routine stops as well – and why it’s essential for immigrants and non-immigrants to understand.
Race Alone Cannot Justify an Immigration Stop
A critical holding in Noem v. Perdomo is that apparent race or ethnicity, standing alone, cannot furnish reasonable suspicion for an immigration stop. This principle is essential. Without it, individuals could be stopped and questioned simply because of how they look, rather than because of any actual evidence of unlawful conduct.
The Use of Race as a “Relevant Factor”
The Court’s analysis becomes more complicated where it acknowledges that apparent ethnicity may be considered a “relevant factor” when combined with other circumstances. This language is drawn from earlier Supreme Court precedent involving immigration enforcement near the border. Although race is not permitted to be the sole basis for a stop, allowing it to be considered at all raises serious concerns about implicit bias and unconstitutional profiling.
Border Enforcement and Historical Context
The cases relied upon by the Court in Perdomo largely involved border or near-border enforcement. Historically, courts have granted immigration authorities broader discretion in these settings, recognizing the government’s heightened interest in border security. However, those cases were grounded in specific geographic and factual contexts.
The Expanding Definition of the “Border”
Under federal immigration law, immigration officers are granted certain enforcement powers within 100 air miles of any U.S. border. This definition includes many major cities and millions of residents. As a result, a large portion of the population lives within an area where border-related reasoning may be invoked, even during routine traffic stops or street encounters. This also has major implications even in Michigan due to the proximity of Canadian borders and is interpreted to include the following FULL states, in addition to Michigan: Florida, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland.
Interior Immigration Stops and Legal Uncertainty
More recent Supreme Court language emphasizes that interior immigration stops must not be based on race or ethnicity. However, the Court has not clearly reconciled this principle with earlier statements allowing race to be considered as one factor. This lack of clarity creates uncertainty for courts, law enforcement, and individuals alike – which, at the very least, provides grounds for argument in court.
Practical Consequences for Communities
Unclear constitutional standards do not remain abstract. They influence policing practices and directly affect real people. When legal boundaries are poorly defined, enforcement tends to fall disproportionately on communities of color, increasing fear, mistrust, and unnecessary law enforcement contact.
A Defense-Focused Perspective
Stops that are influenced—directly or indirectly—by race undermine fairness and erode public confidence in the justice system. Noem v. Perdomo highlights the ongoing need for courts to clearly define and enforce the limits of government power in immigration enforcement.
How We Can Help
At HJP Legal, my team and I are committed to protecting constitutional rights and helping clients move forward with dignity. We represent individuals in Michigan, Florida, and California, and we regularly handle cases involving unlawful stops, police overreach, and Fourth Amendment violations.
If you or a loved one believe your rights were violated during an immigration or law enforcement encounter, or if you are facing criminal charges connected to an unlawful stop, contact HJP Legal for a free, confidential consultation at 517.449.6544. We are here to help you make informed decisions and protect your future.