A federal judge has ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to stop conducting random patrols without reasonable suspicion in Los Angeles, marking a significant setback for the agency’s controversial enforcement tactics.
U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong issued a 52-page ruling that criticized ICE’s operations in Los Angeles, where agents have been conducting military-style raids while wearing full military gear, similar to the aggressive tactics that have left farm workers feeling ‘hunted like animals’ across the country. The operations, which increased after pressure from White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller to boost deportation numbers, have caused fear in local communities.
According to MSNBC, the judge directly challenged ICE’s claims about their operations, stating that the federal government wanted the court to believe none of their constitutional violations were happening “in the face of a mountain of evidence.” She ordered ICE to stop denying access to lawyers and conducting patrols without reasonable suspicion, as these actions violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
Evidence shows racial profiling played a key role in ICE operations
During court proceedings, the American Civil Liberties Union presented evidence that ICE agents were specifically targeting Hispanic community members while ignoring potential European immigrants who might be in the country illegally. This was supported by border czar Tom Homan’s public statement on Fox News, where he admitted that ‘physical appearance’ was among the factors ICE considered during their patrols.
More lies. Democrats are not for cartels. ICE officers are arresting people indiscriminately and their tactics are what people are against. Masked, unidentified people disappearing brown people. Legal immigrants are afraid to go out and get snatched for no reason. It’s oppressive
— Marilyn Plum (@MarilynPlum1) July 15, 2025
The government’s defense claimed that ICE raids were careful operations based on surveillance and information from other law enforcement agencies. They argued that stopping and questioning individuals suspected of being undocumented immigrants was acceptable based on the “totality of circumstances.” However, Judge Frimpong found these arguments unconvincing.
In her ruling, the judge ordered that ICE must stop using factors such as race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish, English accent, location, or type of work as bases for stops and detentions. She noted that many people caught in these operations felt they were being “kidnapped” due to ICE’s “threatening presence.”
Recent public opinion appears to support the judge’s stance. A Gallup poll shows that 79 percent of Americans view immigration as “a good thing” for the country, up from 64 percent last year. The percentage of those wanting decreased immigration has dropped from 55 percent to 30 percent, while 62 percent disapprove of President Trump’s handling of immigration issues.
The ruling sets an important precedent for how immigration enforcement must operate within constitutional boundaries. Judge Frimpong’s decision came after the government failed to provide evidence that ICE’s actions were constitutionally valid, despite having nearly a week to do so.
