Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a rare public apology to fellow Justice Brett Kavanaugh, saying her recent remarks about his background were “hurtful” and did not reflect the respect she has for her colleague.
The apology follows comments Sotomayor made last week during a public appearance at the University of Kansas School of Law, where she criticized Kavanaugh for his opinion in an immigration case.
While she did not name her colleague, she referenced a justice whose “parents were professionals” and suggested he may not understand the impact of immigration enforcement on hourly workers.
The remarks were widely interpreted as referring to Kavanaugh, who wrote a concurring opinion in a 2025 Supreme Court decision allowing immigration enforcement sweeps in Los Angeles to resume. In that opinion, Kavanaugh said such encounters are typically brief and that individuals lawfully in the country are usually released.
Sotomayor, who was elevated by former President Barack Obama, said she regretted how her comments were perceived and acknowledged that they crossed a line.
“At a recent appearance at the University of Kansas School of Law, I referred to a disagreement with one of my colleagues in a prior case, but I made remarks that were inappropriate,” she said. “I regret my hurtful comments. I have apologized to my colleague.”
Public apologies between sitting Supreme Court justices are highly unusual, particularly as disagreements are typically confined to written opinions or private discussions.
The underlying dispute stems from a case in which the court’s conservative majority allowed federal immigration authorities to continue certain enforcement actions.
Sotomayor, joined by the court’s liberal wing, dissented, arguing the policy risked targeting individuals based on race, language, or occupation and failed to account for real-world consequences.
Kavanaugh’s concurrence defended the legality of such enforcement practices, noting they have been used across multiple presidential administrations and are consistent with long-standing precedent.
FEDERAL JUDGE STRIKES DOWN INDIANA BAN ON STUDENT IDS FOR VOTING
“To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion; under this court’s case law regarding immigration stops, however, it can be a ‘relevant factor’ when considered along with other salient factors,” Kavanaugh wrote.
Sotomayor is known for her dissents and said Kavanaugh’s concurrence “relegates the interests of U.S. citizens and individuals with legal status to a single sentence, positing that the Government will free these individuals as soon as they show they are legally in the United States.”