The Trump administration's mass deportation agenda suffered a setback on Friday after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling that prevents Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from detaining individuals based on their appearance, native language, or occupation.
A three-judge panel in Los Angeles ruled that plaintiffs—five individuals and three immigration advocacy organisations—were likely to succeed on their claim that ICE agents violated the Fourth Amendment by relying on four factors to form reasonable suspicion for detention: race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at locations such as labourer pick-up sites, and the type of work a person does.
The lawsuit was filed by day labourers who said they were waiting for construction jobs when ICE agents intimidated them without identifying themselves or stating arrest warrants. One plaintiff, American citizen Jason Brian Gavidia, said he was stopped outside a Montebello tow yard, pushed against a fence, and interrogated even after showing his Real ID.
The ruling upheld a temporary injunction issued by District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong in June, which barred ICE from conducting 'roving patrols' without reasonable suspicion. The raids, some at businesses like car washes, triggered protests in Los Angeles in May.
However, the appeals court struck a portion of the injunction that allowed the four factors 'except as permitted by law', deeming the phrase too vague. The court otherwise affirmed the ban on using those factors alone for stops.
