The SCOTUS Shortlist and Immigration: What Their Previous Rulings Reveal

President Biden identified a shortlist of exceptionally well-qualified Black women to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. We researched and analyzed each potential nominee’s past rulings in immigration-related cases.

Published Feb 18, 2022

Based on public reporting, President Joe Biden has identified a shortlist of highly credentialed and exceptionally well-qualified Black women – Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Leondra Kruger, and Judge J. Michelle Childs – to serve on the United States Supreme Court following Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement. With distinguished service in private practice, public service, and on the bench, each of these women would bring a wealth of diverse experience to the Court.

As President Biden evaluates each candidate, he will assess how her past writings and decisions clarify her judicial philosophy, and how that philosophy might inform her rulings if confirmed.

Given the increasing frequency with which federal courts are called upon to resolve questions of immigration law and immigrants’ rights, it is in the immigrant justice movement’s interest to do the same.

This is especially true since Congress has functionally abdicated its traditional role in immigration policy through inertia and inaction. Presidential administrations of both parties increasingly rely on executive action to advance their immigration priorities, and disputes over the legality of their actions often wind up in court. At the state level, Republican officials have either implemented policies that harm immigrant communities or filed suit against pro-immigrant policies. Inevitably, these challenges make their way to our federal courts – and often all the way to the Supreme Court.

Immigrant justice advocates understand the impact Supreme Court decisions have firsthand – from positive rulings on DACA and the census to negative decisions on the Muslim Ban and Remain in Mexico. And while this nominee will not alter the current balance of the Supreme Court, she will have a hand in shaping the law around immigrants’ rights for decades to come.

At this crucial moment, the National Immigration Law Center has carefully researched and analyzed each potential nominee’s past rulings in immigration-related cases.

Read More
Related
Community Alert: Immigration Arrests at Airports

Community Alert: Immigration Arrests at Airports

Updated Jul 29, 2026 This resource provides travel safety tips and other resources for immigrants traveling through U.S. airports.

CHIRLA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

CHIRLA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

This lawsuit challenges a rule by the Trump administration, which requires millions of people to register with the federal government and carry proof of their registration with them at all times, or risk federal criminal...

Last update: Jul 27, 2026

NILC v. ICE

NILC v. ICE

This FOIA lawsuit challenges ICE's failure to produce records related to the administration's alarming increase in unlawful removals of people with pending immigration cases, stays of deportation, and court ordered...

Last update: Jul 15, 2026

How States Are Fighting Back Against Trump’s Mass Deportation Machine

How States Are Fighting Back Against Trump’s Mass Deportation Machine

Published Jul 9, 2026 This report captures pro-immigrant state laws enacted in 2025 and bills signed in the first five months of 2026 to address immigration enforcement.