Lourdes M. Rosado, president of LatinoJustice: ‘These elections are the opportunity to tell Trump that his policies are not acceptable’

John Roberts, the discreet justice who has presided over the United States Supreme Court for two decades, was upset some time ago that people believed the nation’s highest court was making “political decisions.” In several polls, Americans said they were worried not only about how much power the court had amassed but also about all the rulings that have ended up bolstering Donald Trump and his control over the federal government.

Lourdes M. Rosado, an attorney and former head of the Civil Rights Bureau of the New York State Attorney General’s Office, now president and general counsel of the group LatinoJustice PRLDEF, finds it “worrisome” that the Supreme Court, after nearly two years, now “appears more partisan.”

The situation led LatinoJustice to publish a report that examines how the Supreme Court’s 2025–2026 decisions could have irreversible consequences, particularly for the country’s 68 million Latinos. “Latinos have become the canary in the coal mine for testing how far the current administration can go in disregarding and even stripping established civil rights and protections from anyone in our country,” the organization says in the report. “We must call for the transformation of an institution that has calcified into an undemocratic, harm-causing body.”

Since Trump returned to power in January 2025, Latinos — who gave him their vote in the 2024 election — have watched a string of extreme measures unfold: due-process violations, the open-ended application of immigration laws, threats to birthright citizenship and detentions based on how people look. They have also seen debates over voting rights and proposals to monitor them not only in their homes but also at the places where they will cast ballots in the midterm elections on November 3.

Throughout her career, Rosado does not recall witnessing a time of so much “racism,” or seeing how decisions from the Supreme Court are affecting the Latino community so deeply.

The list is long: the ruling in Louisiana v. Callais — in which the High Court limited the use of racial criteria when drawing electoral districts — detentions based on racial criteria, deportations of migrants to third countries, and the troubling overuse of the so‑called emergency docket or shadow docket.

Through that docket, the Supreme Court has issued expedited decisions that have ended up accommodating key requests from Trump, something that, according to LatinoJustice, undermines democracy.

That is how the court cleared the way for the government to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans or granted the administration’s emergency requests to send people to some of the most remote countries in Africa.

Since Trump returned to the White House, his administration has filed 39 emergency requests with the Supreme Court, which ruled in its favor in 74% of the cases, according to the report.

“These court decisions have consequences for millions of people,” Rosado says. “They show that the balance of power has shifted too far toward the executive. We want people to understand what’s at stake. It is very worrying how the Supreme Court is using the shadow docket to resolve important cases without oral arguments and without public explanations.”

For that reason, Rosado says it is imperative that Latinos turn out at the polls on November 3. “It is very important that Latinos vote. We can be a very powerful bloc if we vote.”

Question. What has been the biggest impact of the overuse of the shadow docket on the Latino community?

Answer. A very troubling case is Noem v. Perdomo. The Supreme Court allowed an order that had protected migrants from certain actions in Los Angeles to be lifted. As a result, federal authorities can stop a person because of how they look, for speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, or for having a low‑wage job. The decision weakens protections against racial profiling and disproportionately affects Latinos in this country.

Q. In its report, LatinoJustice expresses great concern about the ruling on birthright citizenship. Why, even though that right was ultimately preserved, does it remain a concern for you?

A. Because the Supreme Court preserved the constitutional right to birthright citizenship by a single vote. It invalidated President Trump’s order, but only five justices said it was illegal under the Constitution. There is a future risk that the court could say there is no such right. The order could have affected the 260,000 babies born here each year, of whom 80% are children of Latina mothers. The decision shows the vulnerability of fundamental protections for the community. Justices like Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito could be preparing for a future when there might be other conservative justices who share the same views about eliminating this constitutional right.

Q. Your organization also highlights the controversial threat to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during the midterm elections. Why does that create so much fear among Hispanic voters, who are protected by the same rights as any citizen of this country?

A. There are many reasons why they fear encountering ICE or other government forces, because there have been many incidents of violence, of U.S. citizens detained by ICE, even deaths of citizens at the hands of ICE. This is the administration’s strategy; they do not want Latinos to vote because they fear their votes could go in another direction.

Q. What does a ruling like Louisiana v. Callais mean for the political representation of Latino voters and what risks does it pose to Latino communities whose congressional districts have been redrawn?

A. In this case, the Supreme Court removed Voting Rights Act protections. That decision reduced the political voice of our Latino communities and other communities of color. After the ruling, we saw the impact on Congress, but, in my view, we will see more changes and more harm to the Latino community in state and local legislatures, because governments can draw maps without considering the impact on communities of color. This ruling may also make it harder to challenge maps that dilute the Latino community’s political voice.

Q. LatinoJustice has called for Supreme Court reform. Which changes do you consider most urgent?

A. I believe some of the most important reform proposals include imposing 18‑year term limits for justices, along with a predictable appointments process. It is important to adopt a mandatory code of ethics that is overseen and enforced by an independent body, not the court itself, because people currently lack confidence in it. Supreme Court justices are the only judges in this country without a mandatory code of ethics, and that is unacceptable. It is also very important to limit the use of the shadow docket.

Q. Weeks before the midterms, the Supreme Court temporarily allowed states to use the federal SAVE database (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) to verify voters’ citizenship. What risks exist that errors could be generated that would particularly affect naturalized voters?

A. The concern is that states will use SAVE to cancel registrations. There are laws prohibiting states from canceling registrations certain days before an election, and we are in a blackout period, a time when states cannot cancel registrations. But the most important thing for Latino citizens now is to check their registration online to confirm they are registered. There is also a risk that their registration has been canceled; then the person has to do the work of registering again.

Q. What concerns do you think is occupying Latino voters the most today?

A. The economy matters, of course, but also ICE’s actions. Many people believed Trump when he said he would only detain criminals, but we now know that was a lie. ICE has detained people who lived in this country for years, even decades, with no criminal records — community members who were working to support their families. I think this is the community’s opportunity to tell Trump that this is unacceptable.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition