Politics
Border Patrol sued for tactics used in Kern County immigration raid
ACLU attorneys representing the United Farm Workers and five Kern County residents have sued the head of the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Border Patrol officials, alleging the Border Patrol’s three-day raid in the southern San Joaquin Valley in early January amounted to a “fishing expedition” that indiscriminately targeted people of color who appeared to be farmworkers or day laborers.
The complaint, filed Wednesday in federal court in the Eastern District of California, alleges that agents from the Border Patrol’s El Centro sector violated protections afforded by federal law and the U.S. Constitution when they rounded up and deported scores of laborers in the country without legal authorization. It seeks class-action relief for everyone subjected to the tactics, which the lawsuit describes as “lawless sweeps, indiscriminate arrests, and coercive expulsions.”
“It’s clear that this was a coordinated operation intended to sweep up as many people as possible, not based on any individualized reason, but based on their apparent race, ethnicity or occupation; arrest them and expel as many of them from the country as possible, regardless of whether they knew their rights or the consequences,” said Bree Bernwanger, an attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, one of three ACLU affiliates representing plaintiffs in the case.
Asked to comment on the allegations, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said Border Patrol enforcement actions are “highly targeted.” Any alleged or potential misconduct by agents would be referred for investigation, the agency said.
A spokesperson for the Border Patrol’s El Centro sector said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
The El Centro sector — headquartered more than 300 miles from Kern County’s sprawling farm fields and orchards — led the unusual January raid at the tail end of the Biden administration. Chief Agent Gregory Bovino, a 25-plus-year veteran who leads the Imperial County unit, headed up the operation without the involvement of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He is named as a defendant in the lawsuit.
Three former Biden administration officials, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to share operational details, told The Times that Bovino “went rogue” with the January raid. No higher-ups knew about the operation before watching it unspool in real time, two of the former officials said.
In official statements, Bovino has justified the raid by noting that the sector’s area of responsibility stretches from the border to the Oregon line, “as mission and threat dictates.” Border Patrol officials have said the raid, dubbed Operation Return to Sender, resulted in the arrests of 78 immigrants in the country illegally, including a child rapist. The agency has not specified how many of the immigrants detained had criminal records.
Advocates on the scene, meanwhile, said the operation indiscriminately targeted Latino farmworkers commuting from the fields along California Route 99 and day laborers soliciting work in the parking lots of big box stores. They estimate close to 200 people were detained.
The Trump administration’s threat of mass immigration raids has sent shock waves across the Central Valley, where a largely immigrant workforce helps harvest a quarter of the food grown in the U.S.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
According to the legal complaint, agents swarmed businesses where farmworkers and day laborers gather, and pulled over vehicles in predominantly Latino neighborhoods, targeting people of color and questioning them about their immigration status. The complaint accuses Border Patrol agents of employing multiple unlawful practices. Among them: detaining people without reasonable suspicion that they were in the country unlawfully, in violation of the 4th Amendment’s prohibitions on unreasonable searches and seizures.
If people declined to answer questions about their immigration status, according to the complaint, agents conducted searches without warrants or consent. In some cases, the complaint alleges, when people who had been pulled over in their cars declined to answer questions, agents responded by “smashing the car’s windows, slashing the car’s tires, and/or ordering or physically pulling people out of vehicles and handcuffing them.”
At the time of the raid, the U.S. Border Patrol said Operation Return to Sender “focused on interdicting those who have broken U.S. federal law, trafficking of dangerous substances, non-citizen criminals, and disrupting the transportation routes used by Transnational Criminal Organizations.”
Instead, according to the complaint, the operation swept up people with pending immigration applications, no criminal histories and established homes in the community. Many of those deported left behind spouses and U.S.-born children, advocates told The Times.
Under federal law, an immigration enforcement officer may, without a warrant, interrogate people about their right to be in the country, as long as people are not involuntarily detained for questioning. More intrusive encounters require reasonable suspicion that a crime is afoot, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The lawsuit offers multiple examples of people it contends were treated unlawfully during the January raid.
Wilder Munguia Esquivel, a 38-year-old Bakersfield resident who works as a day laborer and handyman, was standing outside Home Depot on Jan. 7 when agents in unmarked cars arrived, demanding to see people’s immigration papers, according to the complaint.
When Munguia Esquivel backed away, the complaint says, he was handcuffed and agents rifled through his wallet.
“At no point did the Border Patrol agent identify himself, explain to Mr. Munguia Esquivel why he had stopped him, explain why he had arrested him, or produce a warrant,” the complaint says. “At no point did he ask Mr. Munguia Esquivel about his family, employment or community ties, or undertake any evaluation of whether he posed a flight risk.”
Munguia Esquivel, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, was transported to El Centro and eventually released, according to the complaint.
But scores of other laborers detained in the raid were transported to the El Centro Station for processing, then pressured to sign voluntary deportation agreements, according to the complaint.
Agents coerced people into signing the agreements, the lawsuit says, by detaining them in holding cells without access to sleeping quarters, showers, hygiene products or sufficient food and denying them communication with attorneys or family members. It says agents directed people to sign their names on an electronic screen without informing them of their 5th Amendment right to an immigration hearing. They received a copy of the form they had signed only after they had been expelled to Mexico, it says.
At least 40 of the people arrested were expelled across the border after accepting voluntary departure, the complaint says.
President Trump ran for office promising the largest deportation effort in U.S. history, initially focusing his rhetoric on tracking down undocumented immigrants who have been accused of violent crimes. His administration now says it considers all immigrants in the U.S. without legal authorization to be criminals, because they have violated immigration laws.
The complaint asks the court to compel the Border Patrol and its parent agencies, the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to conduct operations in compliance with the Constitution and federal statutes.
“Without court intervention, we have every reason to expect that Operation Return to Sender was just the first example of what we will continue to see from Border Patrol,” Bernwanger said.
This article is part of The Times’ equity reporting initiative, funded by the James Irvine Foundation, exploring the challenges facing low-income workers and the efforts being made to address California’s economic divide.
Politics
Video: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
new video loaded: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
By David E. Sanger, Gilad Thaler, Thomas Vollkommer and Laura Salaberry
March 1, 2026
Politics
Dems’ potential 2028 hopefuls come out against US strikes on Iran
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Some of the top rumored Democratic potential candidates for president in 2028 are showing a united front in opposing U.S. strikes on Iran, with several high-profile figures accusing President Donald Trump of launching an unnecessary and unconstitutional war.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris said Trump was “dragging the United States into a war the American people do not want.”
“Let me be clear: I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice,” Harris said in a statement Saturday following the joint U.S. and Israeli strikes throughout Iran.
“This is a dangerous and unnecessary gamble with American lives that also jeopardizes stability in the region and our standing in the world,” she continued. “What we are witnessing is not strength. It is recklessness dressed up as resolve.”
Former Vice President Kamala Harris, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are leading Democratic 2028 hopefuls who spoke out against U.S. strikes on Iran. (Big Event Media/Getty Images for HumanX Conference; Reuters/Liesa Johannssen; Mario Tama/Getty Images)
California Gov. Gavin Newsom delivered some of his sharpest criticism during a book tour stop Saturday night in San Francisco, accusing Trump of manufacturing a crisis.
“It stems from weakness masquerading as strength,” Newsom said. “He lied to you. So reckless is the only way to describe this.”
“He didn’t describe to the American people what the endgame is here,” Newsom added. “There wasn’t one. He manufactured it.”
Newsom is currently promoting his memoir, “Young Man in a Hurry,” with recent and upcoming stops in South Carolina, New Hampshire and Nevada — three key early voting states in the Democratic presidential calendar.
Earlier in the day, Newsom said Iran’s “corrupt and repressive” regime must never obtain nuclear weapons and that the “leadership of Iran must go.”
“But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people,” Newsom wrote on X.
California is home to more than half of the roughly 400,000 Iranian immigrants in the United States, including a large community in West Los Angeles often referred to as “Tehrangeles.”
DEMOCRATS BUCK PARTY LEADERS TO DEFEND TRUMP’S ‘DECISIVE ACTION’ ON IRAN
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., a leading progressive voice and “Squad” member, accused Trump of dragging Americans into a conflict they did not support.
“The American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions. This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
“Just this week, Iran and the United States were negotiating key measures that could have staved off war. The President walked away from these discussions and chose war instead,” she continued.
“In moments of war, our Constitution is unambiguous: Congress authorizes war. The President does not,” she said, pledging to vote “YES on Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie’s War Powers Resolution.”
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress. (Daniel Boczarski/Getty Images for Vox Media)
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, another Democrat often mentioned as a potential 2028 contender, also criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress.
“No justification, no authorization from Congress, and no clear objective,” Pritzker wrote on X.
“Donald Trump is once again sidestepping the Constitution and once again failing to explain why he’s taking us into another war,” he continued. “Americans asked for affordable housing and health care, not another potentially endless conflict.”
“God protect our troops,” Pritzker added.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails.
“In our democracy, the American people — through our elected representatives — decide when our nation goes to war,” Shapiro said, adding that Trump “acted unilaterally — without Congressional approval.”
JONATHAN TURLEY: TRUMP STRIKES IRAN — PRECEDENT AND HISTORY ARE ON HIS SIDE
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails. (Rachel Wisniewski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“Make no mistake, the Iranian regime represses its own people… they must never be allowed to possess nuclear weapons,” he said. “But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war.”
Shapiro added that “Congress must use all available power” to prevent further escalation.
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg also accused Trump of launching a “war of choice.”
“The President has launched our nation and our great military into a war of choice, risking American lives and resources, ignoring American law, and endangering our allies and partners,” Buttigieg wrote on X. “This nation learned the hard way that an unnecessary war, with no plan for what comes next, can lead to years of chaos and put America in still greater danger.”
Buttigieg has been hitting early voting states, stopping in New Hampshire and Nevada in recent weeks to campaign for Democrats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who has been floated as a rising national figure within the party, said he lost friends in Iraq to an illegal war and opposed the strikes.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Young working-class kids should not pay the ultimate price for regime change and a war that hasn’t been explained or justified to the American people. We can support the democracy movement and the Iranian people without sending our troops to die,” Gallego wrote on X.
Fox News’ Daniel Scully and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report.
Politics
Commentary: With midterm vote starting, here’s where things stand in national redistricting fight
Donald Trump has never been one to play by the rules.
Whether it’s stiffing contractors as a real estate developer, defying court orders he doesn’t like as president or leveraging the Oval Office to vastly inflate his family’s fortune, Trump’s guiding principle can be distilled to a simple, unswerving calculation: What’s in it for me?
Trump is no student of history. He’s famously allergic to books. But he knows enough to know that midterm elections like the one in November have, with few exceptions, been ugly for the party holding the presidency.
With control of the House — and Trump’s virtually unchecked authority — dangling by a gossamer thread, he reckoned correctly that Republicans were all but certain to lose power this fall unless something unusual happened.
So he effectively broke the rules.
Normally, the redrawing of the country’s congressional districts takes place once every 10 years, following the census and accounting for population changes over the previous decade. Instead, Trump prevailed upon the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, to throw out the state’s political map and refashion congressional lines to wipe out Democrats and boost GOP chances of winning as many as five additional House seats.
The intention was to create a bit of breathing room, as Democrats need a gain of just three seats to seize control of the House.
In relatively short order, California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, responded with his own partisan gerrymander. He rallied voters to pass a tit-for-tat ballot measure, Proposition 50, which revised the state’s political map to wipe out Republicans and boost Democratic prospects of winning as many as five additional seats.
Then came the deluge.
In more than a dozen states, lawmakers looked at ways to tinker with their congressional maps to lift their candidates, stick it to the other party and gain House seats in November.
Some of those efforts continue, including in Virginia where, as in California, voters are being asked to amend the state Constitution to let majority Democrats redraw political lines ahead of the midterm. A special election is set for April 21.
But as the first ballots of 2026 are cast on Tuesday — in Arkansas, North Carolina and Texas — the broad contours of the House map have become clearer, along with the result of all those partisan machinations. The likely upshot is a nationwide partisan shift of fewer than a handful of seats.
The independent, nonpartisan Cook Political Report, which has a sterling decades-long record of election forecasting, said the most probable outcome is a wash. “At the end of the day,” said Erin Covey, who analyzes House races for the Cook Report, “this doesn’t really benefit either party in a real way.”
Well.
That was a lot of wasted time and energy.
Let’s take a quick spin through the map and the math, knowing that, of course, there are no election guarantees.
In Texas, for instance, new House districts were drawn assuming Latinos would back Republican candidates by the same large percentage they supported Trump in 2024. But that’s become much less certain, given the backlash against his draconian immigration enforcement policies; numerous polls show a significant falloff in Latino support for the president, which could hurt GOP candidates up and down the ballot.
But suppose Texas Republicans gain five seats as hoped for and California Democrats pick up the five seats they’ve hand-crafted. The result would be no net change.
Elsewhere, under the best case for each party, a gain of four Democratic House seats in Virginia would be offset by a gain of four Republican House seats in Florida.
That leaves a smattering of partisan gains here and there. A combined pickup of four or so Republican seats in Ohio, North Carolina and Missouri could be mostly offset by Democratic gains of a seat apiece in New York, Maryland and Utah.
(The latter is not a result of legislative high jinks, but rather a judge throwing out the gerrymandered map passed by Utah Republicans, who ignored a voter-approved ballot measure intended to prevent such heavy-handed partisanship. A newly created district, contained entirely within Democratic-leaning Salt Lake County, seems certain to go Democrats’ way in November.)
In short, it’s easy to characterize the political exertions of Trump, Abbott, Newsom and others as so much sound and fury producing, at bottom, little to nothing.
But that’s not necessarily so.
The campaign surrounding Proposition 50 delivered a huge political boost to Newsom, shoring up his standing with Democrats, significantly raising his profile across the country and, not least for his 2028 presidential hopes, helping the governor build a significant nationwide fundraising base.
In crimson-colored Indiana, Republicans refused to buckle under tremendous pressure from Trump, Vice President JD Vance and other party leaders, rejecting an effort to redraw the state’s congressional map and give the GOP a hold on all nine House seats. That showed even Trump’s Svengali-like hold on his party has its limits.
But the biggest impact is also the most corrosive.
By redrawing political lines to predetermine the outcome of House races, politicians rendered many of their voters irrelevant and obsolete. Millions of Democrats in Texas, Republicans in California and partisans in other states have been effectively disenfranchised, their voices rendered mute. Their ballots spindled and nullified.
In short, the politicians — starting with Trump — extended a big middle finger to a large portion of the American electorate.
Is it any wonder, then, so many voters hold politicians and our political system in contempt?
-
World4 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts4 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Denver, CO4 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana7 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT