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.
new video loaded: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
transcript
transcript
Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon
Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.
-
“Full pardon or commutation?” “Full pardon.”
By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff
June 4, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Democrats splintered over a resolution seeking to block the U.S. from assisting Israel’s war against Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed terrorist group, on Thursday.
The measure, offered by progressive Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., would require President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Lebanon. For months, Israel and Hezbollah, a U.S.-designated terrorist group and Iranian proxy, have been at war in southern Lebanon, but the United States has not joined the conflict.
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., rejected the measure. Critics argued the resolution could aid Hezbollah and potentially hamstring U.S. military operations in the country.
Tlaib’s resolution failed 92-324, with more than half of House Democrats joining nearly all Republicans to vote it down.
The Lebanon war powers resolution divided Democrats, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., joining Republicans in rejecting the measure. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg)
REP RASHIDA TLAIB MOVES TO BLOCK US OPERATIONS IN LEBANON BUT IGNORES HEZBOLLAH
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., an Israel critic, was the lone Republican to support Tlaib’s measure. Meanwhile, Reps. Derek Tran, D-Calif., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., voted present.
House Democratic leaders said shortly before the vote they would oppose Tlaib’s resolution and work with the progressive lawmaker on a narrower measure exempting some U.S. military operations in the country. Their statement also denounced Hezbollah as a “violent terrorist organization” and a “sworn enemy of the United States.”
Tlaib, who has accused Israel of committing “ethnic cleansing” in Lebanon, did not mention Hezbollah in her resolution. She and other proponents of the measure also avoided discussing the Iranian proxy force during heated floor debate over the measure.
Republicans highlighted the omission and accused the legislation’s supporters of serving as “proxies for Hezbollah.”
“Apparently they don’t want to see Israel killing Hezbollah, even though it’s Hezbollah that is killing Israeli children, Israeli adults, Israeli elders,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., said Wednesday, referring to his Democratic colleagues.
Tlaib asserted that her resolution would only affect U.S. forces actively engaged in hostilities. Republicans, however, disputed that claim and suggested it would hurt U.S. efforts to counter Hezbollah.
“It doesn’t say anything about [whether] you can keep the Marines that are in the embassy,” Mast said, referring to the U.S. embassy in Beirut. “That’s a pretty big oversight. It doesn’t say anything about whether we can keep United States armed forces that are training missions with the LAF [Lebanese Armed Forces]. Again, pretty big oversight.”
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, attempted to bar U.S. forces from joining Israel’s war in Lebanon. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg)
RASHIDA TLAIB HIT WITH HOUSE CENSURE THREAT, ACCUSED OF ‘CELEBRATING TERRORISM’ IN PRO-PALESTINIAN SPEECH
The debate turned personal when Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, linked Tlaib to Hezbollah.
“Hezbollah is a terrorist organization … and its members are butchers that you like to hang out with to a certain extent,” the Ohio lawmaker said, referring to Tlaib.
A shouting match between the two then broke out, with Tlaib demanding that Miller’s remarks be stricken from the record.
The presiding chair ultimately complied with her request, but Miller doubled down on his remarks.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Yes, I said it. I own it, and I stand by it,” Mast said on behalf of Miller on the floor.
Tlaib’s failed war powers resolution comes as Iran has sought to tie Israel’s invasion of Lebanon to its ceasefire negotiations with the United States.
Hezbollah, which has long helped Iran project power in the region, rejected a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon’s government Thursday.
WASHINGTON — Initial efforts in the Senate failed Thursday to block the $1.8-billion fund that the Trump administration has sought to establish to pay people who claim the government wronged them, though further attempts were likely to come Thursday afternoon.
Republicans narrowly voted down a Democratic amendment to ban the payout fund and then Democrats killed a Republican amendment, which would have prohibited the use of federal money for the fund but would have sent $1.7 billion to the Justice Department’s fraud division.
It was the second effort in Congress to rebuke President Trump in two days, following the House vote Wednesday to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran.
The dueling amendments were proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). They were attached to the reconciliation bill that would fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol, a high priority for Republicans.
The votes came as the Senate began a “vote-a-rama,” during which lawmakers were expected to propose a stream of amendments to the immigration bill on various topics.
The Trump administration’s plan for the payment fund — widely seen as a way for Trump to compensate his political allies, including those who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — set off particular ire from some GOP lawmakers.
The plan has fueled growing unrest within parts of Trump’s party over his governance, compounded by the president’s endorsement of primary challengers to Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), as well as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), which angered some Republican senators.
Cassidy, who lost his primary and has since voiced strong opposition to Trump’s $1.8-billion fund, became a key player in the Thursday votes, voting down Schumer’s amendment but supporting Tillis’.
On Wednesday, Cassidy joined with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) to argue in a court filing that the $1.8-billion fund circumvents Congress’ authority and violates the Constitution’s spending and appropriations clauses.
“It is an unconstitutional attempt to spend the People’s money without Congressional approval,” Cassidy and Booker wrote in an amicus brief filed in the federal court case challenging the fund.
The fund was created by the Justice Department to settle a lawsuit brought by Trump against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Trump and his sons agreed to drop their personal lawsuit against the government in exchange for the creation of the $1.776-billion fund. Critics immediately questioned the plan, and it drew a rare backlash from Republicans.
In late May, GOP senators derailed plans to vote on the immigration bill over their displeasure with the payout fund and with Trump’s desire to use taxpayer funds for his planned White House ballroom. Senate Republicans removed the ballroom funding from the immigration package Wednesday, another setback for Trump.
The Trump administration sought to back away from its plans for the fund this week, following bipartisan outcry and a federal court ruling that temporarily blocked any payouts from the fund. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said Tuesday the administration would end its plans to move ahead with the concept.
But Trump on Wednesday told reporters he didn’t know whether the fund was dead, calling it “a beautiful thing.”
After Schumer proposed the first amendment to ban the fund Thursday morning, the Senate came to a standstill as three key Republican senators deliberated. Schumer framed his effort to ban the fund Thursday as a way to force a referendum on Trump’s plan.
The amendment “offers Republicans a choice: Do you support Donald Trump’s $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund, or do you want to protect the American people and their paychecks?” Schumer said on the Senate floor before the vote.
Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) urged Republicans to reject the amendment, saying Democrats were planning to “play so many games” on Thursday during the marathon session.
“We are going to fund immigration enforcement and border patrol, and I urge my Republican colleagues to stay united on that singular mission,” Moreno said.
The amendment failed after Cassidy voted against it. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and Dan Sullivan of Alaska voted in favor.
Schumer’s amendment was uniformly supported by Democrats, including California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.
Tillis, who also voted against Schumer’s amendment, immediately proposed his amendment. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) urged Democrats to oppose it, saying that the proposal would create “a new slush fund” by giving the money to the Justice Department.
“We heard over the last 48 hours that the acting attorney general said that this fund’s not moving forward. All this amendment does is codify what I believe the policy of the DOJ is,” Tillis said on the floor before voting began on his amendment. “This [fund] is unpopular, this administration has said they’re not moving forward with it; this is an opportunity for us to put it to bed.”
Responded Merkley: “Taking one slush fund and eliminating it and then creating a new slush fund still under control of the attorney general is not the way to go. The way to go is to get rid of these slush funds altogether.”
Trump has faced a recent string of failures, including the House vote Wednesday, a court ruling to remove his name from the Kennedy Center and a record-low approval rating among Americans as concern rises about economic issues, gas prices and Trump’s war with Iran.
On Wednesday, Trump lashed out against the four Republicans who backed the House war powers resolution, calling it “an unpatriotic thing” to do and calling the vote “meaningless.”
“They’re GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves. MAGA!!! President DJT,” Trump wrote.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, contributed to this report.
-
News6 minutes agoTrump, Netanyahu at odds / Elusive Iran deal : Sources & Methods
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour ago'Top Gun: Maverick' actor identified as victim stabbed to death in Tarzana
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoStorm chances return, which could impact Motor City Pride, graduations this weekend across Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoHilton campaigns in San Francisco as California primary votes still being counted
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoCrews cover up AT&T branding as stadium becomes
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoMiami leaders gather for FIFA World Cup Host Committee Gala
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoPackage fire outside Boston’s Museum of African American History under investigation
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoRockies beat reporter Patrick Saunders to leave Denver Post
