The SCOTUS Shortlist and Immigration: What Their Previous Rulings Reveal

Feb 18, 2022 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.

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
The Latest
The Anti-Immigrant Policies in Trump’s Final “Big Beautiful Bill,” Explained

The Anti-Immigrant Policies in Trump’s Final “Big Beautiful Bill,” Explained

Jul 8, 2025 The One Big Beautiful Bill Act slashes health care, nutrition, and tax benefits while expanding detention and enforcement—harming immigrant communities and endangering the U.S. economy. The following report explains how these changes take...

Análisis del fallo de la Suprema Corte en el caso Trump v. CASA

Análisis del fallo de la Suprema Corte en el caso Trump v. CASA

Efrén C. Olivares

Jun 27, 2025 Hoy, la Corte Suprema decidió el caso Trump vs. CASA, el cual impugna la Orden Ejecutiva...

Analyzing the Supreme Court’s Dangerous Decision in Trump v. CASA

Analyzing the Supreme Court’s Dangerous Decision in Trump v. CASA

Efrén C. Olivares

Jun 27, 2025 Today, the Supreme Court decided the case of Trump v. CASA, a challenge to Executive Order...

Tracking the CECOT Disappearances

Tracking the CECOT Disappearances

Jun 24, 2025 More than 280 immigrants have been secretly transferred by the U.S. to El Salvador’s CECOT prison without due process. Read our latest report exposing this human rights issue.