David J. Bier
On July 11, a federal district court in Los Angeles issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from engaging in illegal profiling. Specifically, the order says DHS “may not rely solely on the factors below, alone or in combination, to form reasonable suspicion for a detentive stop, except as permitted by law.” The factors were race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish or accented English, location, or occupation.
At the time, DHS claimed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had not “relied solely on these factors.” If true, the order should have had no effect on ICE’s operations. In fact, the order dramatically affected ICE arrests in the Los Angeles area in July, according to new data from ICE obtained by the Deportation Data Project via Freedom of Information Act requests.
In the Los Angeles area, overall ICE arrests had fallen 66 percent from July 12 to July 28 following the court order. ICE made 756 arrests the week ending July 12, compared to just 258 the week ending July 28. This helps explain why the administration so quickly appealed the decision, despite claiming it would not affect them. The appeals court, however, upheld the district court order.
If we look at ICE arrests of immigrants from Latin countries without deportation orders, criminal charges, or convictions who were arrested on the street—who I previously identified as likely victims of profiling—the decline is even more extreme. In those cases, arrests declined 83 percent from 351 in the week ending July 12 to 60 in the week ending July 28. This is a staggering shift. It almost, but not entirely, reversed the effects of the White House’s May order to start profiling people at Home Depots and worksites. This reduction occurred before DHS conducted a Home Depot raid with Fox News reporters in tow on August 6, which may indicate that it is now more boldly violating the court order even before the Supreme Court rules on its appeal.
Contrary to the government’s initial claims, it is now undeniable that it was engaged in an extremely high level of illegal profiling in Los Angeles. In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the government now admits, “The district court’s injunction now significantly interferes with federal enforcement efforts.” However, as is extensively documented, those enforcement efforts are illegal, causing numerous legal residents to lose their rights to live and work freely in the United States.
Unfortunately, the new data for July show no decline in ICE arrests for people without criminal convictions, charges, or removal orders nationwide. This implies that ICE is likely getting away with rampant profiling in other jurisdictions. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put a stop to these illegal arrests nationwide.
Courts are right to block the government from enforcing laws in a manner that violates constitutional rights. The protest that it prevents them from arresting as many people as they would like is irrelevant. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights exist precisely to prevent the government from using illegitimate means to achieve even legitimate goals. Whether pursuing murder suspects or illegal immigrant day laborers, the government must follow the Constitution. The liberty of all depends on it.