Yesterday in Los Angeles, a federal judge issued an unprecedented order that temporarily suspends Trump administration practice of arresting immigrants for immigration violations in Southern California without reasonable suspicion of unlawful presence–an important rebuke of recent ICE tactics.
U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, appointed by former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden to preside in California’s Central District by Barack Obama, granted a temporary restraining order against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Department of Homeland Security agencies on Tuesday afternoon, directly addressing immigrant advocacy groups’ and individuals’ allegations that federal agents conducted roving patrols that stopped at bus stops, Home Depots, car washes, day labor sites markets Latino neighborhoods solely based on appearance, language occupation occupation or location by federal agents without regard for appearance, language occupation occupation or location by federal agents on their appearance, language occupation occupation or location by federal agents on solely appearance, appearance language occupation or location (sources LA Magazine | Politico | Wall Street Journal).
Judge Frimpong issued a 52-page ruling finding such practices violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. She stated agents cannot rely solely or jointly upon factors like race, ethnicity (e.g. speaking Spanish with an accent), location or type of work to justify stops or arrests in this way (Los Angeles Times; Wall Street Journal and New York Post both included as sources).
The order affects seven California counties: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo–and mandates that detained individuals have unimpeded access to legal representation: eight hours during weekdays and four on weekends with free phone calls to attorneys; this also covers free phone calls with attorneys. It was first reported by Los Angeles Times with Facebook as having over 7K likes on it for Politico plus 7k more on it from Los Angeles Times plus 7.
Plaintiffs — undocumented individuals and U.S. citizens alike–provided evidence of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detaining people while waiting at bus stops, working in car washes or farms, shopping at swap meets, or attending swap meets without legal justification (New York Post +2
Wall Street Journal +2 Los Angeles Times).
One plaintiff, an U.S. citizen, was stopped for profiling purposes despite providing identification; agencies are no longer allowed to engage in this kind of racial and occupational profiling (YouTube +13; The Wall Street Journal +13 and Los Angeles Times both report this).
Frimpong stressed in court that the government’s request was relatively modest: to discontinue unlawful roving patrols targeting vulnerable communities. She cited as examples the Los Angeles Times (+1), CalMatters (+5) and Washington Post (-5).
She stated, “Regardless of skin color, language spoken or place of employment – all are guaranteed their constitutional rights”.. According to CalMatters
Since early June, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol (BP) has conducted an ongoing immigration sweep intended to ramp up deportations efforts and has drawn public protests throughout Southern California. Their operations provoked massive demonstrations; heavily-armed agents sometimes joined by National Guard forces were met with community resistance during cannabis farm raids in Ventura County (resulting in approximately 200 arrests and at least one fatality due to workers falling off greenhouse roof), as reported by New York Post. This ruling comes amid this immigration sweep’s one month-long effort designed by ICE/BP designed to speed deportationss as they ramped up deportations efforts with its objective of speeding deportationss accelerated. It caused mass protests across Southern California; its operations caused mass protests across Southern California due to mass deportations. These operations caused mass protests all throughout its scope, prompting mass protests across Southern California where heavy armed agents accompanied by National Guard forces faced community resistance-most noticeably during cannabis farm raids conducted by heavily armed agents sometimes accompanied by National Guard forces encountered community resistance- most notable during cannabis farm raid of Ventura County which saw approximately 200 arrests made before at least one fatality when worker fell from greenhouse roof during which an investigation by FBI is now under way as per New York Post article from this source (New York Post article available here).
Local officials quickly welcomed the ruling as an affirmation of constitutional protections and called on President Donald Trump’s administration to comply. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass hailed “justice won today”, reflecting California’s oppositional position towards federal response to sanctuary city policies (El Pais and The Times of India reported this).
However, both Homeland Security and ICE strongly opposed this ruling, with DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin calling accusations of profiling “disgusting and categorically FALSE.” She maintained that enforcement operations are highly targeted while agents operate within legal boundaries (The Times of India +5 || Wall Street Journal || New York Post).
The federal government signaled its intent to appeal, asserting that immigration policy falls within executive jurisdiction–not judicial–and decrying the ruling as an excessive use of courts.
Legal experts believe the temporary restraining order could become permanent, with courts likely considering more extensive preliminary injunctions to limit future enforcement actions and require ICE to establish individual probable cause before detaining individuals during interior immigration operations.
Immigrant communities will welcome this ruling as providing essential procedural safeguards; for the federal government it poses new operational obstacles. According to observers, observers warn this decision could limit large-scale immigration sweeps–unless overturned on appeal. A hearing to determine a permanent injunction order should take place within weeks.