SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Federal agents block people protesting an ICE immigration raid at a nearby licensed cannabis farm on July 10, 2025 near Camarillo, California. Protestors stood off with federal agents for hours outside the farm in the farmworker community in Ventura County.
The 9th Circuit upholds lower court ruling against ICE raids denounced as 'unconstitutional' by legal plaintiffs in California.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit late Friday backed a lower court ruling which found immigration raids targeting people based on their apparent racial identity, language spoken, or vicinity of their capture are unlawful—a decision which dealt a further blow to President Donald Trump's authoritarian policies aimed at migrant workers and working-class communities in California and beyond.
In its ruling, the 3-judge panel of the federal court upheld a previous ruling by a U.S. District Court in early July which found the targeting of migrants during the raids was based not on suspicion of wrongdoing or criminal activity of any kind, but simply for speaking Spanish, appearing to be a certain ethnicity, or being near a location where certain workers tend to congregate, such as a bus stop, large hardware store, or agriculture site.
The ruling stems from a case brought against the Trump administration by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Public Counsel, workers, and others who argue the raids, which have touched off community anger and unease for months, are, in the words of Public Counsel's senior attorney Mark Rosenbaum, "unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety."
The 9th Circuit ruling means the lower court's ban on such raids in certain areas of southern California will remain in place while the case proceeds.
"Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away." —Lindsay Toczylowski, Immigrant Defenders Law Center
As the New York Times notes, the latest ruling leaves the Trump administration with two legal options. "It can ask all the active Ninth Circuit judges to reconsider the panel’s Friday night decision," the newspaper notes, "or it could ask the Supreme Court to issue a stay of [the lower court order issued on July 7.]"
In the meantime—though the legal battle is far from over—the plaintiffs in the case celebrated the ruling and vowed to continue their fight against Trump's far-right, anti-immigrant agenda.
"This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," said Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "We look forward to holding the federal government accountable for these authoritarian horrors it unleashed in Southern California, and we invite every person of conscience to join us in defending the integrity and freedom of communities of color across the country."
Lindsay Toczylowski, president and CEO of Immigrant Defenders Law Center, another party to the suit, also heralded the ruling.
"This decision reaffirms that nobody is above the law—not even the federal government," said Toczylowski. "Southern California was never going to back down in the face of lawless attacks on our immigrant communities. Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away. While we celebrate this hard-fought victory, we remain relentless in protecting our clients in the courtroom and beyond."
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit late Friday backed a lower court ruling which found immigration raids targeting people based on their apparent racial identity, language spoken, or vicinity of their capture are unlawful—a decision which dealt a further blow to President Donald Trump's authoritarian policies aimed at migrant workers and working-class communities in California and beyond.
In its ruling, the 3-judge panel of the federal court upheld a previous ruling by a U.S. District Court in early July which found the targeting of migrants during the raids was based not on suspicion of wrongdoing or criminal activity of any kind, but simply for speaking Spanish, appearing to be a certain ethnicity, or being near a location where certain workers tend to congregate, such as a bus stop, large hardware store, or agriculture site.
The ruling stems from a case brought against the Trump administration by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Public Counsel, workers, and others who argue the raids, which have touched off community anger and unease for months, are, in the words of Public Counsel's senior attorney Mark Rosenbaum, "unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety."
The 9th Circuit ruling means the lower court's ban on such raids in certain areas of southern California will remain in place while the case proceeds.
"Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away." —Lindsay Toczylowski, Immigrant Defenders Law Center
As the New York Times notes, the latest ruling leaves the Trump administration with two legal options. "It can ask all the active Ninth Circuit judges to reconsider the panel’s Friday night decision," the newspaper notes, "or it could ask the Supreme Court to issue a stay of [the lower court order issued on July 7.]"
In the meantime—though the legal battle is far from over—the plaintiffs in the case celebrated the ruling and vowed to continue their fight against Trump's far-right, anti-immigrant agenda.
"This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," said Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "We look forward to holding the federal government accountable for these authoritarian horrors it unleashed in Southern California, and we invite every person of conscience to join us in defending the integrity and freedom of communities of color across the country."
Lindsay Toczylowski, president and CEO of Immigrant Defenders Law Center, another party to the suit, also heralded the ruling.
"This decision reaffirms that nobody is above the law—not even the federal government," said Toczylowski. "Southern California was never going to back down in the face of lawless attacks on our immigrant communities. Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away. While we celebrate this hard-fought victory, we remain relentless in protecting our clients in the courtroom and beyond."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit late Friday backed a lower court ruling which found immigration raids targeting people based on their apparent racial identity, language spoken, or vicinity of their capture are unlawful—a decision which dealt a further blow to President Donald Trump's authoritarian policies aimed at migrant workers and working-class communities in California and beyond.
In its ruling, the 3-judge panel of the federal court upheld a previous ruling by a U.S. District Court in early July which found the targeting of migrants during the raids was based not on suspicion of wrongdoing or criminal activity of any kind, but simply for speaking Spanish, appearing to be a certain ethnicity, or being near a location where certain workers tend to congregate, such as a bus stop, large hardware store, or agriculture site.
The ruling stems from a case brought against the Trump administration by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Public Counsel, workers, and others who argue the raids, which have touched off community anger and unease for months, are, in the words of Public Counsel's senior attorney Mark Rosenbaum, "unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety."
The 9th Circuit ruling means the lower court's ban on such raids in certain areas of southern California will remain in place while the case proceeds.
"Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away." —Lindsay Toczylowski, Immigrant Defenders Law Center
As the New York Times notes, the latest ruling leaves the Trump administration with two legal options. "It can ask all the active Ninth Circuit judges to reconsider the panel’s Friday night decision," the newspaper notes, "or it could ask the Supreme Court to issue a stay of [the lower court order issued on July 7.]"
In the meantime—though the legal battle is far from over—the plaintiffs in the case celebrated the ruling and vowed to continue their fight against Trump's far-right, anti-immigrant agenda.
"This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," said Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "We look forward to holding the federal government accountable for these authoritarian horrors it unleashed in Southern California, and we invite every person of conscience to join us in defending the integrity and freedom of communities of color across the country."
Lindsay Toczylowski, president and CEO of Immigrant Defenders Law Center, another party to the suit, also heralded the ruling.
"This decision reaffirms that nobody is above the law—not even the federal government," said Toczylowski. "Southern California was never going to back down in the face of lawless attacks on our immigrant communities. Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away. While we celebrate this hard-fought victory, we remain relentless in protecting our clients in the courtroom and beyond."