Amended Complaint: Immigration Raids Driven by Racial Discrimination

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 27, 2026

Press Contact:

ImmDef Communications: media@immdef.org

Amended Complaint: Immigration Raids Driven by Racial Discrimination

Plaintiffs Add Equal Protection and Unreasonable Manner of Seizure Claims in Ongoing Federal Case

LOS ANGELES – Since last June, the Trump administration’s immigration raids in Southern California have followed a troubling pattern: Latino residents stopped without reasonable suspicion, Border Patrol deployed far from the border, and militarized operations justified by inflammatory rhetoric portraying immigrants as a threat to “civilization.” 

Today, plaintiffs in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem moved to amend their complaint to allege that these raids, which feature intrusive military-style tactics, are not just unlawful, but deliberately designed to target Latino communities—in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection guarantee and the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable seizure. 

“Trump’s immigration stops are discriminatory in design and execution,” said ACLU Foundation of Southern California (ACLU SoCal) Immigrants’ Rights Director Eva Bitran, representing the plaintiffs. “ICE and Border Patrol’s racist agenda extends from DHS leadership down to rank-and-file officers who deliberately target Latino community members—often with great force—because of their race. Our community suffers the consequences of this unconstitutional conduct.”

The amended complaint includes two new claims:

• Equal protection: The government is intentionally discriminating against Latino communities in California, choosing whom to stop and which locations to raid based on race, and treating Latino people differently because of their apparent ethnicity.

• Unreasonable tactics: ICE and Border Patrol use highly intrusive tactics in carrying out their raids—such as handcuffing, confinement, moving people to a secondary location, and prolonged detention. Agents are quick to both show and use force, often arriving with weapons drawn and using force even when community members are already compliant. These tactics are unreasonable and turn encounters into unlawful arrests. 

  
  

“This is not rogue enforcement, it is a top-down campaign of racial profiling,” said Mark Rosenbaum, senior special counsel for strategic litigation at Public Counsel. “This administration has advanced a policy that singles out Latino communities and presumes car wash workers, nannies, and day laborers are criminals based solely on the color of their skin. When agents stop, handcuff, and detain people based on appearance—deliberately upending workplaces and families to advance a political agenda—they are violating the Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and freedom from unreasonable seizure. Those protections are not selective, they apply to everyone.”

Residents, workers, and advocacy groups sued DHS in July 2025, alleging unconstitutional stop and detention practices by agents tied to arbitrary enforcement quotas. 

A federal district court initially issued a temporary restraining order limiting certain enforcement actions. In August 2025, without offering any reasoning whatsoever, the Supreme Court granted the government’s request to stay that order while litigation proceeds, allowing the challenged practices to continue. 

"The Constitution does not bend to the whims of a racist and anti-immigrant administration, nor do its guarantees disappear when immigration enforcement practices are politically motivated and intentionally cruel," said Alvaro M. Huerta, director of litigation and advocacy at Immigrant Defenders Law Center. "We've amended our lawsuit to protect the basic dignity owed to every person in Southern California and across the country, no matter their skin color or perceived race. We reject, and will continue to resist, any policy that relies on militarized violence and racial profiling to achieve its heartless agenda"

“This violence against immigrant communities is not an accident—it is the objective,” said Pablo Alvarado, co-executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON). “What we are witnessing in Southern California is a coordinated campaign to terrorize workers, separate families, and push entire communities into the shadows. The Constitution does not allow the government to treat brown skin as inherently suspicious. These raids are designed to instill fear and normalize racial profiling under the guise of enforcement. We stand with the plaintiffs because immigrant communities deserve equal protection and freedom from state-sponsored intimidation. This administration must be held accountable for violating the fundamental human rights of the people it is sworn to serve.”

The suit was originally brought by five individual Latino workers and three membership organizations—the Los Angeles Worker Center Network (LAWCN), United Farm Workers (UFW), and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA)—as well as Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a legal services provider.  

The plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU SoCal; Public Counsel; UC Irvine School of Law Immigrant and Racial Justice Solidarity Clinic; NDLON; Munger Tolles & Olson LLP; Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin; ACLU Foundations of Northern California and San Diego & Imperial Counties; Hecker Fink LLP; Martinez Aguilasocho Law, Inc.; CHIRLA; and Immigrant Defenders Law Center. 

See the amended complaint:

https://www.immdef.org/litigation-and-advocacy/vasquez-perdomo-v-noem

###