The Trump administration Thursday appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in an attempt to lift a court order preventing aggressive federal immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area.
A proposed class action lawsuit alleges federal agents made immigration arrests without probable cause, an argument supported in a ruling by a Los Angeles federal judge last month.
The emergency petition by the U.S. Department of Justice came after an appeals court last week denied the government’s bid to lift the temporary restraining order stopping the government’s “roving patrols” that characterized enforcement methods.
“This case involves a district-court injunction that threatens to upend immigration officials’ ability to enforce the immigration laws in the Central District of California by hanging the prospect of contempt over every investigative stop of suspected illegal aliens,” according to the Justice Department’s application to the Supreme Court to cancel the lower court order.
Because “1 in every 10 people is an illegal alien” in the DOJ’s Central District of California, which has jurisdiction in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, government attorneys argued roving patrols were in line with the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.
DOJ lawyers also argued that “many locations unlawfully employ illegal aliens and are known to hire them on a day-to-day basis; that certain types of jobs — like day labor, landscaping, and construction — are most attractive to illegal aliens because they often do not require paperwork; that the vast majority of illegal aliens in the District come from Mexico or Central America; and that many only speak Spanish,” according to the government’s filing submitted to Justice Elena Kagan.
The California Department of Finance reported the Greater Los Angeles population, which excludes Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties in the Central Coast region, was around 18.6 million people this year.
The Supreme Court will decide whether to grant emergency relief from the temporary restraining order as the lawsuit plays out this year in LA federal court.
Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, rebuked the attempt to overturn the lower court’s order.
“When masked, armed immigration agents abducted people off the streets of Southern California simply because they appear to be Latino or low- wage workers, the entire nation saw how the federal government’s reckless and cruel raids frayed the fabric of one of America’s most vibrant and diverse regions,” Tajsar said in a statement. “The federal government has now gone running to the Supreme Court asking it to undo a narrow court order — applicable in only one judicial district — that merely compels them to follow the Constitution. We look forward to making our case to the Supreme Court that the federal government cannot deprive individuals of their liberty without justification, regardless of their immigration status.”
On Aug. 1, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the federal government’s request to reverse the order prohibiting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies from continuing what U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong ruled were unlawful actions in LA and other Southern California counties.
The roving patrols targeting car washes, parking lots where day laborers gather and garment factories disrupted immigrant communities for weeks starting June 6 through early July, with enforcement activity continuing though with a bit less frequency. The immigration raids caused widespread fear and sparked at times violent, destructive protests in downtown LA and elsewhere in the region.
More than a dozen people were arrested Friday in another overnight demonstration downtown, the LAPD reported.
On July 11, Frimpong granted temporary restraining orders preventing the government from stopping individuals without sufficient probable cause and requiring federal agents to provide detainees with access to attorneys.
The government appealed the TRO pertaining to immigration stops and requested first an appeals court, now the Supreme Court pause the order while the case is pending before Frimpong. She has scheduled a hearing for Sept. 24 in downtown LA to consider a longer-lasting order known as a preliminary injunction.
A three-judge 9th Circuit panel, each appointed by a Democratic president, denied the request to stay the TRO after a July 28 hearing in San Francisco. The appellate judges upheld Frimpong’s finding that federal agents appeared to rely solely on race and factors such as Spanish speaking in determining who to arrest for alleged immigration law violations.
A July 2 lawsuit by Southern California residents, workers and advocacy groups accuses immigration enforcement agents of “abducting and disappearing” community members via tactics that include unlawful stops and warrantless arrests. The suit also alleges federal agencies confine individuals at a federal facility in illegal conditions while denying access to attorneys.
Lead plaintiff Pedro Vasquez Perdomo says he was waiting to be picked up for a construction job at a bus stop June 18 in Pasadena when he and two others were surrounded by masked men with guns, arrested and taken to a detention center in Los Angeles, where he was in custody for three weeks. Vasquez Perdomo, 54, of Pasadena, has since been granted bond and released.
The agents who arrested Vasquez Perdomo never identified themselves as federal agents authorized to make immigration arrests or informed the plaintiffs of the basis for their arrests, according to the lawsuit.
“I am afraid that just standing outside can mean being taken again,” Vasquez Perdomo said at a recent news conference. “I was targeted because I’m Latino, because I’m a day laborer, because I’m invisible.”
Vasquez Perdomo said he became a plaintiff in the case because “I don’t want silence to be my story. I want justice, for me and for every other person whose humanity has been denied.”
In a statement following the appeals court ruling, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin emphasized the government’s focus on deporting people accused of crimes.
“What makes someone a target of ICE is if they are illegally in the U.S. — NOT their skin color, race, or ethnicity. America’s brave men and women are removing murderers, MS-13 gang members, pedophiles, rapists — truly the worst of the worst from Golden State communities,” McLaughlin said.
“No federal judge has the authority to dictate immigration policy — that authority rests with Congress and the president,” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement last week. “Enforcement operations require careful planning and execution; skills far beyond the purview or jurisdiction of any judge. The Trump administration looks forward to continuing to implement its immigration policies lawfully.”
The Supreme Court’s website has the DOJ’s application to stay the order blocking federal agencies’ current methods for enforcing immigration laws.
