2026年6月22日 美国东部时间上午11:27 / 福克斯新闻
“那深肤色拉丁裔人、其他拉丁裔人以及其他少数族裔群体成员该怎么办？”异议意见中如此问道
作者：罗伯特·施马德 福克斯新闻
阿利托在最高法院事关移民保护的高风险案件中抨击基于种族的主张
最高法院大法官塞缪尔·阿利托驳斥了关于终止海地移民临时保护身份是出于对非白人移民的种族偏见的说法。
本周一，大法官塞缪尔·阿利托和克拉伦斯·托马斯对最高法院拒绝受理一起案件表示异议，他们称该案件迫使警察为少数族裔制定一套单独的规则。
“允许个人根据旨在证明其所属种族或族裔群体成员比其他群体成员更有可能以某种方式行事的统计数据、研究或专家证词而受到区别对待，这是危险的，”阿利托代表他自己和托马斯写道。“在本案中，这种特殊待遇对涉案个人有利；但在其他情况下，结果则未必如此。”
这起名为“美国诉唐特·J·卡特”的案件涉及一名黑人男子，其枪支和盗窃定罪被撤销，此前哥伦比亚特区上诉法院认定警方在有合理怀疑之前就对他进行了扣押。警方随后从卡特的裤子里搜出一把.40口径手枪，检方称该枪支是从一名联邦调查局特工的车辆中被盗的。
根据哥伦比亚特区法院的说法，“像[卡特]这样的美国黑人‘尤其不信任执法部门’”，因此“与其他人相比，‘不太可能’终止与警方的 encounters，因为他们怀疑任何行使宪法权利的尝试都会得到尊重”。
最高法院驳回波士顿家长的上诉，称招生政策存在种族歧视
最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯和塞缪尔·阿利托合影。（盖蒂图片社）
哥伦比亚特区法院认为，卡特的种族与处于他这种处境的合理之人是否会觉得自己有自由终止与警方的接触有关。法院裁定，此次接触实际上已构成扣押，且该行为非法，因为警方在对卡特采取行动之前并未确立合理怀疑。
阿利托和托马斯辩称，哥伦比亚特区的裁决实际上迫使执法部门基于种族区别对待人们，而最高法院确立的先例禁止这种做法。
“根据这项测试，警官们需要快速评估一个人的种族，如果警官和法院必须为黑人制定特殊规则，那深肤色拉丁裔人、其他拉丁裔人以及其他少数族裔群体成员该怎么办？”阿利托继续说道。“我们曾说过，我们的《宪法》是色盲的。它‘几乎从不’允许政府行为者基于种族区别对待个人。”
最高法院就关键的《投票权法案》规则作出裁决，两党就重划选区展开博弈
2025年2月5日，美国最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯在白宫椭圆形办公室主持帕姆·邦迪宣誓就任美国司法部长的仪式。（安德鲁·哈尼克/盖蒂图片社）
为支持其主张，阿利托援引了“学生公平录取诉哈佛大学案”、“路易斯安那诉卡莱斯案”以及“肖诉里诺案”。
“我们已经驳回了这样一种观点，即宪法允许基于‘认为同一种族群体的成员——无论其年龄、教育程度、经济地位或居住社区如何——想法一致’的看法，对个人区别对待，”阿利托在援引“肖诉里诺案”时写道。
这似乎是对哥伦比亚特区上诉法院的直接挑战，美国的代理律师曾辩称，该法院迫使警官们假设所有黑人对警察都抱有相同的态度，因此在警察在场时会因感到不自在而不愿行使宪法权利。
特朗普的解雇权面临最高法院的双重考验，但某一机构或获特殊待遇
2023年12月，最高法院大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯和塞缪尔·阿利托在华盛顿特区的最高法院大楼内。（杰奎琳·马丁-普尔/盖蒂图片社）
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
卡特——阿利托提到的在本案中受益的个人——最初在被警方走近并询问是否携带武器时，撒谎称自己没有携带武器。
随后警方要求卡特把裤子往上拉，这时他们注意到一个L形凸起，后来确认那是一把被盗自一名联邦特工车辆的.40口径手枪。
Cops could be forced into race-based guessing game after Supreme Court move, Thomas joins dissent
June 22, 2026 11:27am EDT / Fox News
‘What about dark-skinned Latinos, other Latinos, and members of other minority groups?’ the dissent asked
By Robert Schmad Fox News
Alito rips race-based claim in high-stakes migrant protections case at SCOTUS
Supreme Court Justice Alito pushes back on claims that terminating temporary protected status for Haitian migrants was driven by racial bias against non-white immigrants.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas on Monday dissented from the Supreme Court’s refusal to take up a case that they said forces police officers to create a separate set of rules for racial minorities.
“It is dangerous to allow an individual to be treated differently based on statistics, studies, or expert testimony that purports to show that members of the racial or ethnic group to which he belongs are more likely to act in a certain way than are members of other groups,” Alito wrote on behalf of himself and Thomas. “Here, the special treatment helped the individual; in other situations it will not.”
The case, U.S. v. Donte J. Carter, involved a Black man whose firearm and theft convictions were vacated after the D.C. Court of Appeals held that police seized him before they had reasonable suspicion. Officers later recovered a .40-caliber pistol from Carter’s pants and the government said the gun had been stolen from an FBI agent’s vehicle.
According to the D.C. court, “black Americans like [Carter] are ‘especially distrustful of law enforcement’” and therefore “‘less likely’ than other people ‘to terminate a police encounter’ due to skepticism that any attempt to exercise their constitutional rights will be respected.”
SUPREME COURT REJECTS BOSTON PARENTS’ APPEAL CLAIMING RACIAL BIAS IN AN ADMISSIONS POLICY
Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are pictured together.(Getty Images)
The D.C. court reasoned that Carter’s race was relevant to whether a reasonable person in his position would have felt free to end the police encounter. It ruled that the encounter effectively became a seizure, and that such an action was unlawful because police officers hadn’t established reasonable suspicion before subjecting him to it.
Alito and Thomas argued that the D.C. ruling effectively forces law enforcement to treat people differently based on their race, something precedent established by the Supreme Court prohibits.
“Under the test, officers will need to quickly assess a person’s race, and if officers and courts must craft special rules for black persons, what about dark-skinned Latinos, other Latinos, and members of other minority groups?” Alito continued. “We have said that our ’Constitution is color-blind.’ It ‘almost never’ allows government actors to treat persons differently based on their race.”
SUPREME COURT RULES ON KEY VOTING RIGHTS ACT RULE AS REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WAGE REDISTRICTING WAR
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas appears before swearing in Pam Bondi as U.S. Attorney General in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 5, 2025.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
To support his claims, Alito cited Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Louisiana v. Callais and Shaw v. Reno.
“And we have rejected the proposition that the Constitution permits an individual to be treated differently based on a ‘perception that members of the same racial group — regardless of their age, education, economic status, or the community in which they live — think alike,’” Alito wrote, citing Shaw v. Reno.
This appears to be a direct challenge to the D.C. Court of Appeals, which lawyers representing the United States argued forced police officers to assume that all black people have the same attitudes toward police officers and would therefore feel uncomfortable exercising constitutional rights in their presence.
TRUMP’S FIRING POWER FACES TWIN SUPREME COURT TESTS, BUT ONE AGENCY MAY GET SPECIAL TREATMENT
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito are seen inside the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., in December 2023.(Jacquelyn Martin-Pool/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Carter, the individual Alito noted was helped by the case, initially lied to officers by answering in the negative when approached and asked if he was carrying a weapon.
The police then asked Carter to pull his pants up, at which point they noticed an L-shaped bulge which was later identified as a .40-caliber pistol that had been stolen from a federal agent’s vehicle.