Appeal Court Avoids Orders to Stop Trump Administration from Promiscuous Immigration
LOS ANGELES (AP) — The federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold interim orders from lower courts that prevented the Trump administration from cessing and arresting immigrants in Southern California indistinguishable areas.
A panel of three judges in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon when the federal government asked the court to overturn a July 12 interim restraining order issued by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, believing that it hindered their enforcement of immigration laws.
Immigration Advocacy Group filed a lawsuit last month accusing President Donald Trump of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigrants. The lawsuit includes three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs.
Fripon said that according to her order, there was a lot of “evidence” that federal immigration enforcement strategies violated the constitution. She wrote that the government cannot use obvious race or race, speak Spanish or English, with an accent, presence in places such as trailer tracts or car washes, or that a person’s occupation is the only basis for reasonable suspicion of detaining someone.
The Los Angeles area has been the battlefield where the Trump administration stimulates protests and deployment of National Guard and Marine Corps amid its aggressive immigration strategy. Federal agents have resided immigrants without legal status from home warehouses, car washes, bus stops and farms, who have lived in the country for decades.
Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was yelled by federal agents in a video shot by a friend on June 13: “I was born in the eastern United States of Los Angeles state!”
They thought “return us back to an American citizen…can be caught, hit a fence, and take his phone and ID from him just because he works in a trailer yard in the Latino community.”
The federal government argued that a hearing was held next week given that the lawsuit did not have enough time to collect and provide evidence in the lawsuit, given that the lawsuit was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday.
“It’s a very serious matter to say that multiple federal government agencies have policies that are unconstitutional,” said Jacob Roth, a lawyer.
He also argued that the orders from the lower courts were too broad and that the advocates of immigration did not provide enough evidence to prove that the government had a formal policy of unreasonably stopping people.
He mentioned four factors listed in the interim restraining order, saying the court should not completely prohibit the government from using them. He also argued that the order is not clear as permitted under the law.
“Legally, I think it’s appropriate to use these factors to reasonably doubt,” Ross said.
The judge questioned the government’s arguments greatly.
Judge Jennifer said: “No one advises you not to consider these factors at all.”
But these factors alone form a “broad profile” that does not meet the reasonable skepticism that prevents someone, she said.
Biden-appointed Sung said that in a region of Los Angeles, where Latinos make up half of the population, “it’s impossible to eliminate those who have undocumented status, and those who have recorded legal status.”
She also asked, “What are the dangers of being told not to do what you claim you haven’t done yet?”
