LOS ANGELES – California immigrant rights organizations and officials are taking action following the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ Aug. 2 decision to maintain restrictions on federal immigration enforcement across Los Angeles and surrounding counties.
Attorneys and plaintiffs in the Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem case will hold a press conference at 10 a.m. Aug. 4 in front of the ACLU Southern California office at 1313 W. 8th St. following the appeals court’s denial of the Trump administration’s request to lift a temporary restraining order.
The gathering will include representatives from United Farm Workers, Los Angeles Worker Center Network, Immigrant Defenders, Public Counsel, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA). The event will be livestreamed on Instagram and Facebook.
The 9th Circuit denied the federal government’s request to pause a temporary restraining order that prevents immigration agents from stopping individuals based solely on race, language, location or type of work. The decision leaves protections in place across Los Angeles County and six surrounding counties.
Mayor Karen Bass called the appeals court decision “a victory for the rule of law and for the City of Los Angeles.”
“The temporary restraining order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now,” Bass said.
Bass emphasized the city’s continued commitment to protecting immigrant families that “contribute every single day to the life, the culture and the economy of our great city.”
“We must still fight for justice. Los Angeles will stand together against this administration’s efforts to break up families,” Bass said.
The underlying case stems from a July 11 district court ruling that granted two temporary restraining orders. The first prevents the government from stopping individuals in violation of the Fourth Amendment, while the second requires the government to provide detained individuals with access to counsel.
The case alleges that the Department of Homeland Security used illegal and discriminatory tactics to detain community members without warrants and held them in inhumane conditions without access to lawyers.
Mark Rosenbaum, senior special counsel for strategic litigation at Public Counsel, said the ruling “sends a powerful message: the government cannot excuse illegal conduct by relying on racial profiling as a tool of immigration enforcement.”
He characterized the challenged raids as “unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety.”
The legal coalition representing the plaintiffs includes the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Public Counsel, Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin, UC Irvine School of Law Immigrant and Racial Justice Solidarity Clinic, National Day Laborer Organizing Network, ACLU Foundations of Northern California and San Diego & Imperial Counties, Hecker Fink LLP, Martinez Aguilasocho Law, CHIRLA and Immigrant Defenders.
The case could potentially advance to the Supreme Court if the federal government appeals the 9th Circuit’s decision. Rosenbaum warned that such an appeal would ask the justices “to establish, for the first time in our nation’s history, that people can be detained and arrested based solely on their race and appearance.”
“That should deeply alarm all of us,” Rosenbaum said.
The temporary restraining order remains in effect as the case continues through federal court. The ruling affects one of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas as the legal battle over immigration enforcement continues.
