Judge orders Trump administration to stop racial profiling in California immigration raids
The decision was a win for a group of immigration advocates and five people arrested by immigration agents that sued the Department of Homeland Security over what it called a "common, systematic pattern" of people with brown skin forcibly detained and questioned in the Los Angeles area.
In a complaint filed July 2, the group said the area had come "under siege" by masked immigration agents "flooding street corners, bus stops, parking lots, agricultural sites, day laborer corners, and other places." They alleged agents picked out targets to forcefully detain and question solely because they had brown skin, spoke Spanish or English with an accent, and worked as day laborers, farm workers, or other jobs.
Those arrested were denied access to lawyers and held in "dungeon-like" facilities where some were "pressured" into accepting deportation, the lawsuit alleged.
Judge Maame Frimpong of the Central District of California wrote in her order that the group would likely succeed in proving that "the federal government is indeed conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers." Stopping the indiscriminate arrests was a "fairly moderate request," she wrote.
Her order granted an emergency request, and the lawsuit is going.
Frimpong "is undermining the will of the American people," DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to USA TODAY. "America's brave men and women are removing murderers, MS-13 gang members, pedophiles, rapists."
Allegations that agents are making arrests based on skin color are "disgusting and categorically FALSE," McLaughlin said. "DHS enforcement operations are highly targeted, and officers do their due diligence.'
"It does not take a federal judge to recognize that marauding bands of masked, rifle-toting goons have been violating ordinary people's rights throughout Southern California," said Mohammad Tajsar, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing the group.
"We are hopeful that today's ruling will be a step toward accountability for the federal government's flagrant lawlessness."
More: Mentally ill, detained and alone. Trump budget cuts force immigrants to fight in solitude
The Trump administration ramped up immigration raids across California starting in June, widening its focus from those with criminal records to a broader sweep for anyone in the country illegally.
The crackdown sparked ongoing protests, which Trump dispatched National Guard troops and Marines to quell.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Dear Kamala Harris, don't run for office. There's a far more important job for you
From: Joe Mathews Please don't run for governor in 2026. Don't bother running for president in 2028. Instead, take a job more important than either of those posts. It's a job that would fit you even better than the Chloé suits you wore during last year's campaign. It's a job that doesn't exist, but one that California will need to survive this awful moment. Madame Vice President, please use your stature to convince the state to establish the California Autonomy Authority — as an independent commission or part of the executive branch — with you as its founding director. California needs a new agency with broad powers to defend itself against the existential threat of a criminal, authoritarian American nation-state. President Donald Trump's regime has effectively declared war against Californians. Trump dispatched secret police to seize Californians off the streets, deployed troops to back up the secret police, canceled our environmental laws, and illegally cut off funding for vital programs. While Trumpists attack us constantly, we Californians have no full-time body to defend ourselves in this war. Instead, our officials are forced to split their attention between governing their own jurisdictions and defending against federal attacks. In Los Angeles, the federal secret police started arresting people before local leadership, preoccupied with fire rebuilding, knew they were there. Gov. Gavin Newsom has struggled to reconcile the monumental job of managing California's housing and climate crises with the new full-time job of fighting against the federal invasion. His shifting public stances (He's fighting Trump! He's reaching out to Trump!) and presidential ambitions sow cynicism rather than trust. Attorney General Rob Bonta is in a similar bind, juggling litigation against the U.S. with serving as the state's top law enforcement official. We need our public officials to focus on their actual jobs. And we need someone else to take charge of protecting our democracy and defending California against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Your whole career has prepared you for this urgent assignment. Your deep experience in local law enforcement — as San Francisco district attorney — should help you convince local governments, especially local police, to collaborate in defense against Trump. Your six years as California attorney general, representing the entirety of the state government, gave you visibility on state vulnerabilities that Trump might exploit. Your four years in the White House as vice president taught you how intelligence agencies, departments, the military and the U.S. government respond in crises — all lessons that can be applied now in defense of California. You also built contacts across this country (from your presidential campaign) and in world capitals (from your VP travels) that could support California in this moment. In this novel role, you'd combine your public service experiences. For starters, this is a crime-fighting job. Trump is a convicted felon who is violating the law and the Constitution, and his administration, which embraces corruption, has likely been infiltrated by criminals or foreign enterprises seeking advantage. Using the authority's subpoena power, you should investigate and expose criminality — because the Trump-controlled U.S. Department of Justice won't. You also could identify and seek prosecution or civil remedies against masked federal agents who violate Californians' rights. In the process, your authority would create a record of the U.S. regime's crimes to support future federal or international prosecutions, or even a truth-and-reconciliation commission. The job would also involve policymaking. You would determine which laws or governing structures offer California and its local governments the most protection against federal attack. To do that, you might end up creating new agencies in California and possibly other allied states, to replace the federal departments Trump is dismantling. To make this work, you must commit to a term of at least five years. That way, you can serve as the bridge between Newsom, who leaves office at the end of 2026, and the next governor — thus discouraging the Trump administration from exploiting California's transfer of power. And since your term would go to 2030, two years beyond the 2028 presidential election, you'd make clear that California won't stop defending its autonomy even after Trump is gone. Yes, taking this new gig would mean not running for governor or president. But that's not a big sacrifice. Your donors are unenthusiastic about the governor's race, and polls show California voters are at best lukewarm about you. And the Trump people are already busy making sure the 2028 presidential election won't be free or fair. (Betting markets actually give Trump better odds of winning an unconstitutional third term than of any Democrat winning the election.) So, stop debating between running to serve the state (in two years) or the nation (in four). Instead, and right now, start creating and leading a new authority to serve both.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's mass deportation is backfiring
President Donald Trump and his administration continue to bet big on the issue that, more than any other, appeared to help him win him a second term in 2024: immigration. The administration and its allies have gleefully played up standoffs between federal immigration agents and protesters, such as the one Thursday during a raid at a legal marijuana farm in Ventura County, California. And as congressional Republicans were passing a very unpopular Trump agenda bill last month, Vice President JD Vance argued that its historic expansion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and new immigration enforcement provisions were so important that 'everything else' was 'immaterial.' But this appears to be an increasingly bad bet for Trump and Co. It's looking more and more like Trump has botched an issue that, by all rights, should have been a great one for him. And ICE's actions appear to be a big part of that. The most recent polling on this comes from Gallup, where the findings are worse than those of any poll in Trump's second term. The nearly monthlong survey conducted in June found Americans disapproved of Trump's handling of immigration by a wide margin: 62% to 35%. And more than twice as many Americans strongly disapproved (45%) as strongly approved (21%). It also found nearly 7 in 10 independents disapproved. These are Trump's worst numbers on immigration yet. But the trend has clearly been downward – especially in high-quality polling like Gallup's. An NPR-PBS News-Marist College poll conducted late last month, for instance, showed 59% of independents disapproved of Trump on immigration. And a Quinnipiac University poll showed 66% of independents disapproved. Trump has managed to become this unpopular on immigration despite historic lows in border crossings. And the data suggest that's largely tied to deportations and ICE. To wit: 59% overall and 66% of independents disapproved of Trump's handling of deportations, according to the Quinnipiac poll. 56% overall and 64% of independents disapproved of the way ICE was doing its job, according to Quinnipiac. 54% overall and 59% of independents said ICE has 'gone too far' in enforcing immigration law, per the Marist poll. (Even 1 in 5 Republicans agreed.) Americans disapproved 54-45% of ICE conducting more raids to find undocumented immigrants at workplaces, according to a Pew Research Center poll last month. Americans also appear to disagree with some of the more heavy-handed aspects of the deportation program: They disapproved 55-43% of significantly increasing the number of facilities to hold immigrants being processed for deportation, per Pew – even as the Trump administration celebrates Florida's controversial new 'Alligator Alcatraz.' They said by a nearly 2-to-1 margin that it's 'unacceptable' to deport an immigrant to a country other than their own, per Pew – another key part of the administration's efforts. They also disapproved, 61-37%, of deporting undocumented immigrants to a prison in El Salvador – the place where the administration sent hundreds without due process, in some cases in error (such as with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who has since been returned). There's a real question in all of this whether people care that much. They might disapprove of some of the more controversial aspects of Trump's deportations, but maybe it's not that important to them – and they might even like the ultimate results. That's the bet Trump seems to be making: that he can push forward on something his base really wants and possibly even tempt his political opponents to overreach by appearing to defend people who are in the country illegally. But at some point, the White House has got to look at these numbers and start worrying that its tactics are backfiring. Gallup shows the percentage of Americans who favor deporting all undocumented immigrants dropping from 47% last year during the 2024 campaign down to 38% now that it's a reality Trump is pursuing. And all told, Trump's second term has actually led to the most sympathy for migrants on record in the 21st century, per Gallup. Fully 79% of Americans now say immigration is a 'good thing,' compared with 64% last year. The writing has been on the wall that Americans' support for mass deportation was subject to all kinds of caveats and provisos. But the administration appears to have ignored all that and run headlong into problems of its own creation.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
CNN asks Alaska senator if she regrets voting for Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
The Senate passed Trump's so-called 'big, beautiful bill' after a 26-hour marathon of negotiations during which Alaska's Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, as she put it later, 'struggled mightily' to soften the biggest funding blows to her state before ultimately casting a vote that guaranteed its passage. CNN's Manu Raju caught up with Murkowski and asked if she regrets her vote in some of her first public comments about the vote since the bill became law.
