Federal Judge Blocks DHS Immigration Raids Over Racial Profiling in Los Angeles

Court rules DHS violated constitutional rights by targeting based on race, language, and job type

Why it matters:

A federal court has struck down the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) controversial stop-and-arrest tactics during immigration raids in Los Angeles, ruling that the federal agency acted unconstitutionally.

Driving the news:

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong issued two temporary restraining orders (TROs) prohibiting DHS and its agencies from stopping or detaining individuals based solely on race, language, presence in specific public spaces, or employment type. She also ordered DHS to ensure immigrant detainees have access to legal counsel — even on weekends and holidays — at its downtown Los Angeles facility.

What they’re saying:

The ruling follows a lawsuit filed last week by the ACLU of Southern California on behalf of five individuals and advocacy groups. Plaintiffs allege that DHS’s enforcement teams have been targeting communities based on race and language and holding individuals in unsafe conditions without access to attorneys.

Details:

• The first TRO bars DHS agents from stopping people based on:
  • Apparent race or ethnicity
  • Speaking Spanish or English with an accent
  • Being at a location like a car wash, bus stop, or farm site
  • Type of work performed
• The second TRO requires DHS to allow legal counsel to visit detainees at the B-18 federal building every day of the week.

What’s next:

The court’s orders remain in place while the case proceeds. The ruling is viewed as a landmark development in the ongoing legal fight over federal immigration enforcement practices in California.

Between the lines:

This decision places new legal constraints on President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement strategy, particularly in Democrat-led states like California where federal-local cooperation on immigration is limited.

Zoom out:

Both the City and County of Los Angeles, as well as the State of California, supported the plaintiffs. Nine municipalities joined the lawsuit, and the California Attorney General submitted an amicus brief backing the challenge to suspicionless stops.

More reactions:

Other immigration and labor rights groups also celebrated the decision, calling it a “powerful message” that federal agents must obey constitutional boundaries, especially in diverse urban communities.

Go deeper:

• Full Court Order: Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem (ACLU SoCal)
• ACLU Press Statement

Virginia Times Interns contributed to this report.

For more news updates, follow Virginia Times at gnbnow.com