A U.S.-born construction worker in Alabama has filed a federal lawsuit after being detained twice by immigration agents despite being a citizen. The case highlights growing concerns over workplace raids that critics say target Latino workers regardless of their legal status.
The lawsuit was filed by 28-year-old Leo Garcia Venegas, a concrete worker who has lived and worked in Baldwin County, Alabama, his entire life. Venegas said he was detained by immigration officers on two separate occasions within a matter of weeks, even though he provided valid identification both times. His lawsuit, filed in partnership with the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, seeks to stop what he and his attorneys call unconstitutional and discriminatory enforcement tactics.
Venegas, who specializes in laying concrete foundations, explained that both encounters happened at construction sites where agents arrived without warrants. In each case, he showed officers his Alabama-issued Real ID driver’s license, a document only available to U.S. citizens and legal residents. Despite this, officers accused him of carrying a fake ID before eventually releasing him. In one incident, he was forced to the ground while insisting he was an American citizen. A coworker filmed the confrontation, showing agents focusing on Latino workers while leaving others alone.
The lawsuit comes just weeks after the Supreme Court lifted a restraining order that had limited immigration agents in Los Angeles from detaining people based solely on race, language, job, or location. That decision gave federal agents greater leeway in immigration enforcement, even as legal battles over such practices continue.
The Department of Homeland Security dismissed the Alabama case, calling it “race-baiting opportunism.” Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for DHS, stated that immigration arrests are based on “reasonable suspicion” of unlawful presence, not race or ethnicity. However, she did not explain why Venegas, a confirmed U.S. citizen, was detained twice.
Venegas said the repeated encounters have left him fearful and frustrated. “It feels like there is nothing I can do to stop immigration agents from arresting me whenever they want,” he said in a statement released through his attorneys. “I just want to work in peace. The Constitution protects my ability to do that.”
The lawsuit describes a pattern of raids where agents enter workplaces without warrants, round up groups of workers, and disproportionately target individuals with Latino names or appearances. According to the Institute for Justice, Venegas’s experience reflects a broader problem of racial profiling. The legal complaint accuses DHS of authorizing raids under the assumption that certain workers, particularly Latinos in construction, are likely to be undocumented.
In one of the incidents in May, Venegas was detained for more than an hour. In the second, he was held for about 20 minutes before being released. His attorneys argue that these unlawful stops not only violated his rights but also endangered his livelihood and safety. “Immigration officers are not above the law,” said Jaba Tsitsuashvili, one of his lawyers. “Leo is a hard-working American citizen standing up for everyone’s right to work without being detained for the way they look or the job they do.”
Venegas’s case also highlights the climate of fear surrounding workplace raids under Trump-era enforcement policies. These raids often target industries like construction and agriculture, where immigrant labor is widespread. Advocates say the raids not only disrupt communities but also sweep up U.S. citizens who are misidentified by agents.
The Gulf Coast region, where Venegas works, has seen rapid population growth over the last 15 years, bringing greater demand for construction workers. Many in the industry are Latino, both immigrants and citizens. Venegas’s attorneys argue that the raids are designed less to enforce immigration law than to intimidate workers in these industries.
Legal experts note that the courts have long struggled to balance immigration enforcement with constitutional rights. While presidents have wide latitude in directing enforcement priorities, repeated detentions of citizens like Venegas raise significant constitutional concerns. His case could become a major test of how far immigration officers can go in workplace raids and whether U.S. citizens can be wrongly targeted without consequence.
For Venegas, the lawsuit is about more than his own experience. He says it is about ensuring that workers across the country can do their jobs without fear of unlawful detention. His attorneys are seeking not only compensation for his treatment but also an injunction to block further raids conducted in the same manner.
The case now moves forward in federal court, where it could set an important precedent for how immigration enforcement is carried out in workplaces nationwide.
