California voters are sharply divided along partisan lines over the Trump administration’s immigration raids this year in Los Angeles and across the nation, according to a new poll.

Just over half of the state’s registered voters oppose federal efforts to reduce undocumented immigration, and 61% are against deporting everyone in the nation who doesn’t have legal status, according to a recent poll by UC Berkeley’s Possibility Lab released to The Times on Wednesday.

But there is an acute difference in opinions based on political leanings.

Nearly 80% of Democrats oppose reducing the number of people entering the United States illegally, and 90% are against deporting everyone in the country who is undocumented, according to the poll. Among Republicans, 5% are against reducing the entries and 10% don’t believe all undocumented immigrants should be forced to leave.

“The big thing that we find, not surprisingly, is that Democrats and Republicans look really different,” said political scientist Amy Lerman, director of UC Berkeley’s Possibility Lab, who studies race, public opinion and political behavior. “On these perspectives, they fall pretty clearly along party lines. While there’s some variation within the parties by things like age and race, really, the big divide is between Democrats and Republicans.”

While there were some differences based on gender, age, income, geography and race, the results largely mirrored the partisan divide in the state, Lerman said.

One remarkable finding was that nearly a quarter of survey respondents personally knew or were acquainted with someone in their family or friend groups directly affected by the deportation efforts, Lerman said.

“That’s a really substantial proportion,” she said. “Similarly, the extent to which we see people reporting that people in their communities are concerned enough about deportation efforts that they’re not sending their kids to school, not shopping in local stores, not going to work,” not seeking medical care or attending church services.

The poll surveyed a sample of the state’s registered voters and did not include the sentiments of the most affected communities — unregistered voters or those who are ineligible to cast ballots because they are not citizens.

A little more than 23 million of California’s 39.5 million residents were registered to vote as of late October, according to the secretary of state’s office.

“So if we think about the California population generally, this is a really significant underestimate of the effects, even though we’re seeing really substantial effects on communities,” she said.

Earlier this year, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement launched a series of raids in Los Angeles and surrounding communities that spiked in June, creating both fear and outrage in Latino communities. Despite opposition from Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and other elected Democrats, the Trump administration also deployed the National Guard to the streets of the nation’s second-largest city to, federal officials said, protect federal immigration officials.

The months since have been chaotic, with masked, armed agents randomly pulling people — most of whom are Latino — off the streets and out of their workplaces and sending many to detention facilities, where some have died. Some deportees were flown to an El Salvador prison. Multiple lawsuits have been filed by state officials and civil rights groups.

In one notable local case, a federal district judge issued a ruling temporarily blocking federal agents from using racial profiling to carry out indiscriminate immigration arrests in the Los Angeles area. The Supreme Court granted an emergency appeal and lifted that order, while the case moves forward.

More than 7,100 undocumented immigrants have been arrested in the Los Angeles area by federal authorities since June 6, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

On Monday, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), Bass and other elected officials hosted a congressional hearing on the impact of immigration raids that have taken place across the country. Garcia, the top Democrat on the House’s oversight committee, also announced the creation of a tracker to document misconduct and abuse during ICE raids.

While Republican voters largely aligned with Trump’s actions on deportations, 16% said that they believed that the deportations will worsen the state’s economy.

Lerman said the university planned to study whether these numbers changed as the impacts on the economy are felt more greatly.

“If it continues to affect people, particularly, as we see really high rates of effects on the workforce, so construction, agriculture, all of the places where we’re as an economy really reliant [on immigrant labor], I can imagine some of these starting to shift even among Republicans,” she said.

Among Latinos, whose support of Trump grew in the 2024 election, there are multiple indications of growing dissatisfaction with the president, according to separate national polls.

Nearly eight in 10 Latinos said Trump’s policies have harmed their community, compared to 69% in 2019 during his first term, according to a national poll of adults in the United States released by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center on Monday. About 71% said the administration’s deportation efforts had gone too far, an increase from 56% in March. And it was the first time in the two decades that Pew has conducted its survey of Latino voters that the number of Latinos who said their standing in the United States had worsened increased, with more than two-thirds expressing the sentiment.

Another poll released earlier this month by Somos Votantes, a liberal group that urges Latino voters to support Democratic candidates, found that one-third of Latino voters who previously supported Trump rue their decision, according to a national poll.

Small business owner Brian Gavidia is among the Latino voters who supported Trump in November because of financial struggles.

“I was tired of struggling, I was tired of seeing my friends closing businesses,” the 30-year-old said. “When [President] Biden ran again I’m like, ‘I’m not going to vote for the same four years we just had’ … I was sad and I was heartbroken that our economy was failing and that’s the reason why I went that way.”

The East L.A. native, the son of immigrants from Colombia and El Salvador, said he wasn’t concerned about Trump’s immigration policies because the president promised to deport the “worst of the worst.”

He grew disgusted watching the raids that unfolded in Los Angeles earlier this year.

“They’re taking fruit vendors, day laborers, that’s the worst of the worst to you?” he remembered thinking.

Over a lunch of asada tortas and horchata in East L.A., Gavidia recounted being detained by Border Patrol agents in June while working at a Montebello tow yard. Agents shoved him against a metal gate, demanding to know what hospital he was born at after he said he was an American citizen, according to video of the incident.

After reviewing his ID, the agents eventually let Gavidia go. The Department of Homeland Security later claimed that Gavidia was detained for investigation for interference and released after being confirmed to be a U.S. citizen with no outstanding warrants. He is now a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and immigrant advocacy groups alleging racial profiling during immigration raids.

“At that moment, I was the criminal, at that moment I was the worst of the worst, which is crazy because I went to go see who they were getting — the worst of the worst like they said they were going to get,” Gavidia said. “But turns out when I got there, I was the worst of the worst.”

EXCLUSIVE – Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley – the South Texas nonprofit long known for its migrant shelter run by Sister Norma Pimentel – has been suspended from receiving federal funds and now faces a rare six-year debarment after a Department of Homeland Security investigation found major grant violations, according to internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) documents shared exclusively with Fox News Digital.

The action, taken by FEMA on behalf of DHS on Nov. 19-20, follows months of warnings and data reviews that auditors say uncovered sweeping inaccuracies, large gaps in migrant records and significant billing outside federally allowed timeframes.

The suspension applies only to this South Texas affiliate, not to Catholic Charities USA or any other Catholic Charities chapters nationwide.

In a formal Notice of Suspension and Proposed Debarment, DHS officials accused the organization of submitting migrant data so inconsistent the agency could not verify whether many of the people it reported serving had ever appeared in DHS databases.

BORDER CZAR TOM HOMAN SLAMS CATHOLIC CHURCH, SAYS ‘SECURE BORDER SAVES LIVES’

Investigators also alleged at least 248 instances in which the nonprofit billed the government for services outside the 45-day window federal rules allow for migrants released from DHS custody.

FEMA concluded the group provided assurances that its spreadsheets were accurate and compliant, statements the agency said were “false” or “not entirely truthful,” according to the documents.

The proposed punishment is unusually severe. While federal debarments typically run three years, DHS is seeking a six-year ban due to what it describes as a pattern of “pervasive” problems that spanned multiple programs and multiple years.

LAWYERS CHALLENGE DEPORTATION OF HUNDREDS OF MINORS TO GUATEMALA

If finalized, the designation would cut the organization off from most federal funding streams and flag it in the government-wide System for Award Management, warning agencies and pass-through partners not to issue new grants.

Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley (CCRGV) now has 30 days to respond, submit documentation or request a meeting to argue it remains “presently responsible.” If it does not, the six-year ban would likely go into effect.

The DHS findings center heavily on migrant intake data the nonprofit submitted to justify millions of dollars in payments through FEMA’s Emergency Food and Shelter-Humanitarian program (EFSP-H) and its newer Shelter Services Program. FEMA said it asked the group to provide names, A-numbers, countries of origin and evidence of DHS encounters for individuals it claimed to assist. In response, the nonprofit told the agency all migrants had A-numbers recorded and asserted its spreadsheets were accurate within a 4.99% margin of error.

TEXAS SUES COUNTY FOR HELPING MIGRANTS ACCESS LEGAL SUPPORT AS THEY FIGHT DEPORTATION: ‘EVIL AND WICKED’

Auditors said the reality was far different. In sample sets reviewed by the agency, A-numbers were frequently missing, truncated to four digits, or replaced with phone numbers and other stray entries. Error rates reached 21%, 26% and 42% across three spreadsheets, the documents show. When FEMA tested 100 names, it could not find 61 of them in DHS systems at all.

Investigators also stressed the Rio Grande chapter’s 45-day rule violations. Under federal guidelines, NGOs may only bill for food, shelter or transport for migrants within 45 days of their release from DHS custody.

FEMA told the organization it found at least 248 cases where billing dates occurred after that window had closed, raising concerns that federal dollars were used for services outside what the law allows. The agency wrote that such activity could amount to “potential criminal activity,” though DHS has not said whether it plans to refer the case for criminal review.

TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN SPARKS BIPARTISAN CALL FOR ASYLUM FIXES, PROTECTION FOR LONGTIME MIGRANTS

The documents further cite the nonprofit’s own posted FY 2024 audit, which reported “material weaknesses” in internal controls over federal awards, inconsistent intake procedures and missing documentation for roughly 5% of sampled recipients. FEMA said corrective-action plans were copied forward almost verbatim year to year, without meaningful improvements.

Catholic leaders have recently pushed back against efforts to cut funding. Pope Leo XIV praised Catholic Charities USA this fall as “agents of hope,” commending its 168 agencies for decades of work with migrants, refugees and the poor.

Pimentel, who leads the Rio Grande Valley branch, has for years been a national figure in migrant ministry. Her Humanitarian Respite Center once processed more than 1,500 migrants per day at the height of mass crossings. She has been publicly praised by the Vatican for her humanitarian work and has spoken out against a return to the Remain in Mexico policy, saying families forced to wait in Mexico suffered “tremendously.”

But her organization has also been a political focal point. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has pursued cases against several Catholic migrant shelters, accusing them of encouraging illegal immigration and operating illegal “stash houses,” including his suit against Annunciation House in El Paso. A judge earlier this year blocked Paxton from deposing Sister Norma in that separate matter.

The suspension now places the Rio Grande Valley operation under simultaneous federal and state scrutiny. It is not yet clear whether other local shelters or municipal partners can absorb the South Texas caseload if the nonprofit ultimately loses federal funds. CCRGV currently serves far fewer migrants than in prior years, but remains one of the region’s key intake points.

DHS has not said when a final decision on debarment will be made. The organization continues to operate during the suspension period but cannot receive new federal awards until the matter is resolved.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to Catholic Charities for comment.

DHS noted to Fox News Digital that future debarments may occur and that investigations remain ongoing.

In a fiery rebuttal to allegations he’d criminally misrepresented facts in his mortgage documents, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) sued Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte on Tuesday — accusing him of criminally misusing government databases to baselessly target President Trump’s political opponents.

“Pulte has abused his position by scouring databases at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — two government-sponsored enterprises — for the private mortgage records of several prominent Democrats,” attorneys for Swalwell wrote in a federal lawsuit filed in Washington, D.C. “He then used those records to concoct fanciful allegations of mortgage fraud, which he referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution.”

They said Pulte launched his attack on Swalwell at a particularly inopportune time, just as Swalwell was launching his campaign for California governor.

Pulte’s attack, Swalwell’s attorneys wrote, “was not only a gross mischaracterization of reality” but “a gross abuse of power that violated the law,” infringing on Swalwell’s free speech rights to criticize the president without fear of reprisal, and violating the Privacy Act of 1974, which they said bars federal officials from “leveraging their access to citizens’ private information as a tool for harming their political opponents.”

Pulte, the FHFA and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

Pulte has previously defended his work probing mortgage documents of prominent Democrats, saying no one is above the law. His referrals have exclusively targeted Democrats, despite reporting on Republicans taking similar actions on their mortgages.

Swalwell’s lawsuit is the latest counterpunch to Pulte’s campaign, and part of mounting scrutiny over its unprecedented nature and unorthodox methods — not just from targets of his probes but from other investigators, too, according to one witness.

In addition to Swalwell, Pulte has referred mortgage fraud allegations to the Justice Department against Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, who have all denied wrongdoing and suggested the allegations amount to little more than political retribution.

James was criminally charged by an inexperienced, loyalist federal prosecutor specially appointed by Trump in Virginia, though a judge has since thrown out that case on the grounds that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed. The judge also threw out a case against former FBI Director James Comey, another Trump opponent.

Cook’s attorneys slammed Pulte in a letter to the Justice Department, writing that his “decision to use the FHFA to selectively — and publicly — investigate and target the President’s designated political enemies gives rise to the unmistakable impression that he has been improperly coordinating with the White House to manufacture flimsy predicates to launch these probes.”

Schiff also has lambasted Trump and Pulte for their targeting of him and other Democrats, and cheered the tossing of the cases against James and Comey, calling it “a triumph of the rule of law.”

In recent days, federal prosecutors in Maryland — where Schiff’s case is being investigated — have also started asking questions about the actions of Pulte and other Trump officials, according to Christine Bish, a Sacramento-area real estate agent and Republican congressional candidate who was summoned to Maryland to answer questions in the matter last week.

Pulte has alleged that Schiff broke the law by claiming primary residence for mortgages in both Maryland and California. Schiff has said he never broke any law and was always forthcoming with his mortgage lenders.

Bish has been investigating Schiff’s mortgage records since 2020, and had repeatedly submitted documents about Schiff to the federal government — first to the Office of Congressional Ethics, then earlier this year to an FHFA tip line and to the FBI, she told The Times.

When Trump subsequently posted one of Schiff’s mortgage documents to his Truth Social platform, Bish said she believed it was one she had submitted to the FHFA and FBI, because it was highlighted exactly as she had highlighted it. Then, she saw she had missed a call from Pulte, and was later asked by Pulte’s staff to email Pulte “the full file” she had worked up on Schiff.

“They wanted to make sure that I had sent the whole file,” Bish said.

Bish said she was subsequently interviewed via Google Meet on Oct. 22 by someone from the FHFA inspector general’s office and an FBI agent. She then got a subpoena in the mail that she interpreted as requiring her to be in Maryland last week. There, she was interviewed again, for about an hour, by the same official from the inspector general’s office and another FBI agent, she said — and was surprised their questions seemed more focused on her communications with people in the federal government than on Schiff.

“They wanted to know if I had been talking to anybody else,” she said. “You know, what did I communicate? Who did I communicate with?”

Schiff’s office declined to comment. However, Schiff’s attorney has previously told Justice Department officials that there was “ample basis” for them to launch an investigation into Pulte and his campaign targeting Trump’s opponents, calling it a “highly irregular” and “sordid” effort.

The acting FHFA inspector general at the time Bish was first contacted, Joe Allen, has since been fired, which has also raised questions.

On Nov. 19, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) — the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — wrote a letter to Pulte denouncing his probes as politically motivated, questioning Allen’s dismissal and demanding documentation from Pulte, including any communications he has had with the White House.

Swalwell’s attorneys wrote in Tuesday’s lawsuit that he never claimed primary residence in both California and Washington, D.C., as alleged, and had not broken any laws.

They accused Pulte of orchestrating a coordinated effort to spread the allegations against Swalwell via a vast network of conservative influencers, which they said had “harmed [Swalwell’s] reputation at a critical juncture in his career: the very moment when he had planned to announce his campaign for Governor of California.”

They said the “widespread publication of information about the home where his wife and young children reside” had also “exposed him to heightened security risks and caused him significant anguish and distress.”

Swalwell said in a statement that Pulte has “combed through private records of political opponents” to “silence them,” which shouldn’t be allowed.

“There’s a reason the First Amendment — the freedom of speech — comes before all others,” he said.