
Federal judge orders ICE to halt immigration raids in Southern California
"As required by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Defendants shall be enjoined from conducting detentive stops in this District unless the agent or officer has reasonable suspicion that the person to be stopped is within the United States in violation of U.S. immigration law," U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong wrote in her ruling.
In the legal filing, the ACLU and immigrant rights groups claim that federal agents are violating the Constitution by arresting people solely based on skin color, performing raids without warrants and denying legal counsel to detainees.
"No matter the color of their skin, what language they speak, or where they work, everyone is guaranteed constitutional rights to protect them from unlawful stops," ACLU attorney Mohammad Tajsar said.
Lawyers for the Trump administration denied the claims during the trial. The U.S. Department of Justice did not comment on whether the federal government would appeal the ruling. U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli wrote in a post to X after Frimpong's ruling on Friday that "federal agents will continue to enforce the law and abide by the U.S. Constitution."
"We strongly disagree with the allegations in the lawsuit and maintain that our agents have never detained individuals without proper legal justification," Essayli wrote. "Our federal agents will continue to enforce the law and abide by the U.S. Constitution."
Frimpong issued two temporary restraining orders that prevent immigration agents from stopping people without reasonable suspicion and require DHS to provide access to counsel for people detained in the downtown L.A. federal building. Frimpong, whom President Biden appointed, criticized the Trump administration in her ruling.
"Roving patrols without reasonable suspicion violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution and denying access to lawyers violates the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution," Frimpong wrote. "What the federal government would have this Court believe—in the face of a mountain of evidence presented in this case—is that none of this is actually happening."
At the center of the federal lawsuit is Montebello man Brian Gavidia, who was detained by immigration agents last month.
"One thing I would like to highlight was the fact that even though after I stated and proved I was American, they took away my phone," Gavidia said outside the courthouse in Los Angeles on Thursday
Los Angeles, along with seven other cities and L.A. County, joined the ACLU's lawsuit earlier this week, claiming the immigration raids also violate a Constitutional amendment that protects states' rights to run their judicial systems.
"Essentially, what the challengers are arguing here isn't that the Trump administration just lacks the power to enforce immigration law but that they're doing it the wrong way, and they're doing it in a way that violates constitutional provisions like the due process clause," Loyola Law professor Jessica Levinson said.
In addition to the city and county of L.A., the coalition of cities that joined the lawsuit includes Culver City, Montebello, Monterey Park, Pasadena, Pico Rivera, Santa Monica and West Hollywood.
"It's been more than a month since Angelenos awoke to a completely frightening and new reality on our city streets," L.A. City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto said. "We are here today because of the tactics and the disproportionate force being used by the federal government in our communities. We stand as one community. These unconstitutional roundups and raids cannot be allowed to continue. This cannot be the new normal."
One of the attorneys who is representing the municipalities is former U.S. Attorney Martin Estrada, whom President Biden appointed.
The lawsuit also claims that ICE operations have cost the cities tens of millions of dollars in expenses, including overtime. Since enforcement actions ramped up on June 6, L.A. County has incurred $9 million in extra costs, stemming from lost tax revenue and law enforcement resources, according to the Office of County Counsel. L.A. County officials likened the economic impact on the region to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Since operations began in June, ICE and CBP have arrested 2,792 people in the L.A. area, according to DHS.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court overturns Mosby's mortgage fraud conviction, upholds perjury charges
Former Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby walks out of the U.S. District Court in Greenbelt with her daughers after Mosby's sentencing in May 2024. (Photo by Bryan Sears/Maryland Matters) A federal appeals court gave former Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby a partial win Friday, overturning her 2024 conviction for mortgage fraud but upholding perjury convictions in connection with the purchase of two Florida homes. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also reversed a lower court's order that Mosby forfeit a Florida condo as a result of the mortgage fraud conviction, noting that with the conviction now overturned, the forfeiture was improper. Neither Mosby's attorneys nor prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maryland immediately responded to requests for comment on the case Friday. Friday's ruling is the latest turn in the legal trials of Mosby, who served two terms as Baltimore's top prosecutor, from 2105-2023. She was indicted in 2022 by a federal grand jury on two counts of perjury, for falsely claiming a COVID-19 hardship on an application to withdraw $90,000 from her retirement account, and two counts of mortgage fraud, on charges she made false statements on mortgage applications for the two vacation homes in Florida that she bought in 2021. Her trials on the charges were held separately. At her perjury trial, Mosby argued that questions on the form that was the basis of her perjury conviction were 'fundamentally ambiguous.' The form asked if she had suffrered 'adverse financial consequences' during the COVID-19 pandemic that justified allowing her to withdraw retirement funds early without penalty; she said she feared the pandemic could affect Mahogany Elite, a travel firm she had founded. Former prosecutor Mosby gets probation for perjury, false claims convictions But prosecutors argued that Mahogany Elite could not have suffered financial consequences because it was brand new — she had 'not yet started the company, earned any revenue, or incurred any costs.' Jurors apparently agreed, convicting her on Nov. 9, 2023, of both perjury counts. At her mortgage fraud trial, Mosby argued that prosecutors never established that she was in Maryland when the alleged crimes occurred, but an overbroad jury instruction allowed them to determine she was, even in the absence of evidence. That jury convicted her on Feb. 7, 2024, of a single fraud count. Federal prosecutors sought 20 months in jail for Mosby, in addition to supervised release and the forfeiture of her Longboat Key vacation condo. But U.S. District Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby sentenced Mosby to three years supervised release, with one of those years under home confinement, along with the forfeiture of the condo. On appeal, the circuit court rejected her claims on the 'ambiguous' form, saying it was without merit. It was 'adequately clear' on the form what 'adverse financial consequences' meant, Circuit Judge Stephanie Thacker wrote in the ruling. But the court agreed with Mosby on the jury instruction, saying the trial court's instruction to jurors regarding the mortgage fraud case's venue was indeed 'erroneously overbroad.' Thacker's opinion said those instructions 'went so far as to say that the Government did not need to 'prove that the crime itself was committed in this district,''only that acts leading up to the crime were done in Maryland. That was wrong, Thacker wrote. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE After vacating the mortage fraud conviction, Thacker wrote, the court had to vacate the forfeiture of Mosby's condo in Longboat Key, what had originally been ordered because the condo was believed to be 'the fruit of the alleged mortgage fraud.' In a partial dissent, Judge Paul Niemeyer said he would have upheld the mortgage fraud conviction along with the perjury convictions. He wrote that the evidence at her trial 'amply and clearly demonstrated that venue was proper in Maryland by a preponderance of the evidence.' 'It showed that Mosby made the false statement in Maryland by obtaining and signing the false gift letter in Maryland and that she transmitted the statement from Maryland by uploading it to the Internet for use at the closing in Florida,' Niemeyer wrote. 'She also engaged her husband to wire the funds from Maryland in support of the gift letter. ' Those were all elements of the crime, which justfied its trial in Maryland, he wrote.


CNET
30 minutes ago
- CNET
This Massive AT&T Data Breach Settlement Could Pay $5K to Some: Find Out if You're Eligible
The 2024 hack of AT&T servers was one of the five biggest data breaches of the year. AT&T/CNET It's a tough time for AT&T -- especially with the recent conference call troubles for Donald Trump -- but their struggles could be your gain thanks to the $177 million settlement it's agreed to pay to customers that fell victim to data breaches in 2019 and 2024. On Friday, June 20, US District Judge Ada Brown granted preliminary approval to the terms of a proposed settlement from AT&T that would resolve two lawsuits related to the data breaches. The current settlement would see AT&T pay $177 million to customers adversely affected by at least one of the two data breaches. The settlement will prioritize larger payments to customers who suffered damages that are "fairly traceable" to the data leaks. It will also provide bigger payments to those affected by the larger of the two leaks, which began in 2019. While the company is working toward a settlement, it has continued to deny that it was "responsible for these criminal acts." For all the details we have about the settlement right now, keep reading, and for more info about other recent settlements, find out how to claim Apple's Siri privacy settlement and see if you're eligible for 23andMe's privacy breach settlement. What happened with these AT&T data breaches? AT&T confirmed the two data breaches last year, announcing an investigation into the first in March before confirming it in May and confirming the second in July. The first of the confirmed breaches began in 2019. The company revealed that about 7.6 million current and 65.4 million former account holders had their data exposed to hackers, including names, Social Security numbers and dates of birth. The company began investigating the situation last year after it reported that customer data had appeared on the dark web. The second breach began in April of 2024, when a hacker broke into AT&T cloud storage provider Snowflake and accessed 2022 call and text records for almost all of the company's US customers, about 109 million in all. The company stressed that no names were attached to the stolen data. Two individuals were arrested in connection with the breach. Both of these incidents sparked a wave of class action lawsuits alleging corporate neglect on the part of AT&T in failing to sufficiently protect its customers. Who is eligible to file a claim for the AT&T data breach settlement? As of now, we know that the settlement will pay out to any current or former AT&T customer whose data was accessed in one of these data breaches, with higher payments reserved for those who can provide documented proof that they suffered damages directly resulting from their data being stolen. If you're eligible, you should receive a notice about it, either by email or a physical letter in the mail, sometime in the coming months. The company expects that the claims process will begin on Aug. 4, 2025. How much will the AT&T data breach payments be? You'll have to "reasonably" prove damages caused by these data breaches to be eligible for the highest and most prioritized payouts. For the 2019 breach, those claimants can receive up to $5,000. For the Snowflake breach in 2024, the max payout will be $2,500. It's not clear at this time how the company might be handling customers who've been affected by both breaches. AT&T will focus on making those payments first, and whatever's left of the $177 million settlement total will be disbursed to anyone whose data was accessed, even without proof of damages. Because these payouts depend on how many people get the higher amounts first, we can't say definitively how much they will be. When could I get paid from the AT&T data breach settlement? AT&T expects that payments will start to go out sometime in early 2026. Exact dates aren't available but the recent court order approving the settlement lists a notification schedule of Aug. 4, to Oct. 17, 2025. The deadline for submitting a claim is currently set at Nov. 18, 2025. The final approval of the settlement needs to be given at a Dec. 3, 2025, court hearing for payments to begin. Stay tuned to this piece in the coming months to get all the new details as they emerge. For more money help, check out CNET's daily tariff price impact tracker.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stocks Fall Pre-Bell as Trump Ramps Up Tariff Pressure on Canada
US equity markets were tracking in the red before Friday's open after President Donald Trump announc Sign in to access your portfolio