Videos presented during the Perdomo v. Mullin case show that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents used racial slurs to refer to Latinos they encountered during traffic stops.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California (ACLU SoCal), videos obtained directly from ICE and presented in court show federal immigration officers using terms such as "tonks" and "wet" to refer to people who appeared Latino and were perceived as low-income or working-class, in what advocates argue were stops largely based on racial profiling.
In a video cited in the filing, one agent can be heard telling another, "Yeah, just plug us in wherever you see some tonks..." Other agents can also be heard guessing whether people were "wet" based solely on their appearance, according to a statement released by ACLU SoCal on July 28.
As noted in the statement, "tonks" is a derogatory and violent term referring to the sound of a flashlight striking someone's head, while "wet" is short for "wetback," a racial slur historically used against Mexican and other Latino immigrants who crossed the Rio Grande.
The video in question centers on a June 2025 raid at a Home Depot in Hollywood. In footage from the operation, one immigration officer can be heard through his body camera saying, "There was a guy... he was just sitting in that minivan," while using a racial slur to refer to the individual. During the same raid, another officer can be heard saying, "Yeah, just plug us in where you see some," before using another racial slur to identify alleged targets.
In another video referenced in the case and reported by The Hill, an officer can be heard saying, "One... f--ing got away, dude," while again using a racial slur to refer to a person who escaped arrest. He repeated the slur before touching his body camera and asking, "How do you turn off the camera?"
A separate video recorded on Aug. 6 shows U.S. Border Patrol agents pointing to a backpack and asking, "Whose backpack is that?" before repeating the question using a racial slur.
"This filing should shock the conscience. Evidence gathered from the government has confirmed what our communities have known all along: immigration officers are flagrantly violating the law by detaining people without justification and often primarily because of the color of their skin," said Mayra Joachin, deputy director of immigrants' rights at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, which represents the plaintiffs.
According to the plaintiffs and sworn testimony, agents allegedly conducted traffic stops based on racial profiling. Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), said the records presented in court show the stops were "never about safety" but instead about "skin color."
"We repudiate this racial profiling in the strongest terms. Our communities deserve better," Salas added.
The suit was originally brought by five Latino workers and three membership organizations, including CHIRLA, the Los Angeles Worker Center Network (LAWCN), and the United Farm Workers (UFW), along with the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a legal services provider.
The court filing argues that the Constitution prohibits law enforcement from using race as a substitute for individualized suspicion and contends the stops violated the Fourth and Fifth amendments.
In response, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told The Hill that officers "are focused on protecting the American people" and instead pointed to crimes committed by people living in the United States illegally.
"Where is the media's outrage for Angel families who lost a loved one to illegal alien crime?" the spokesperson told the newspaper.
