A federal judge has temporarily stopped immigration raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Southern California. The decision came after a lawsuit was filed by civil rights groups, claiming that federal agents were making arrests based on race, language, and location rather than legal grounds.
U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong issued the order on Friday, restricting ICE and related federal agents from conducting “detentive stops” without reasonable suspicion. She made it clear that race, language, or being in certain public places cannot be used as reasons to stop someone.
According to the ruling, agents are not allowed to detain people simply for speaking Spanish or having an accent, nor can they rely on someone’s appearance or location—such as waiting at a bus stop or working at a car wash—as justification. Judge Frimpong emphasized that these types of actions go against the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The lawsuit, filed by the ACLU and immigrant rights groups, argued that federal agents arrested individuals without warrants and denied them legal counsel. They claimed these actions were based on racial profiling, which violates basic constitutional protections. The plaintiffs included several Southern California cities, including Los Angeles, Pasadena, and Santa Monica.
In her decision, the judge also issued a second restraining order. This one required that detainees held in the downtown Los Angeles federal building be allowed access to legal counsel, as protected under the Fifth Amendment. She strongly criticized the federal government’s claim that these practices were not happening, pointing to overwhelming evidence presented in court.
The case centers on Brian Gavidia, a Montebello man who said he was detained even after showing proof that he is a U.S. citizen. According to Gavidia, agents took his phone and ignored his statements, highlighting what critics say are common abuses during recent enforcement operations.
City and county officials argue that the raids are not only unconstitutional but also costly. Los Angeles County reported spending about $9 million since the operations began on June 6, including overtime pay and lost tax revenue. They compared the financial impact to the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents had arrested 2,792 people in the Los Angeles area since June. However, officials from affected cities claim that these enforcement actions create fear in communities, hurt local economies, and strain public resources.
California Governor Gavin Newsom responded to the court’s decision by saying justice was served. He stressed that the ruling protects the rights of all residents, regardless of race, language, or where they work. Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles called the ruling a major victory for civil rights, stating that the city would never accept what she described as un-American actions.
The U.S. Department of Justice, which defended the Trump-era raids during the court hearings, did not say whether it would appeal the judge’s decision. U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, however, posted on social media that federal agents will continue enforcing the law while respecting the Constitution.
Legal experts say the core issue is not whether the federal government can enforce immigration laws, but how they do it. Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson explained that the lawsuit argues the government’s methods violate due process and other constitutional guarantees.
The case has drawn national attention and could set a legal precedent for how immigration laws are enforced across the United States. It also highlights growing tension between federal immigration policy and local governments that are pushing back against tactics they see as unjust.
