The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Southern California has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, presenting alarming evidence of racial profiling by federal immigration agents in Los Angeles. The filings include body camera footage and text messages that allegedly show agents using racial slurs and targeting individuals based on their perceived ethnicity.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of several individuals, including U.S. citizens, alleges that agents conducted stops and detentions without justification, primarily based on the color of their skin. The evidence includes derogatory terms such as “tonk” and “wet,” which are allegedly used to refer to Latinos in a demeaning manner.
Evidence of Racial Profiling
The court filings include body camera footage and forensically recovered text messages that provide a disturbing glimpse into the mindset of the agents. In one video, an agent is heard saying, “Yeah, just plug us in wherever you see some tonks and we’ll jump out.” The term “tonk” is reportedly derived from the sound an agent’s utility flashlight makes when hitting a migrant’s head.
In another video, an agent is heard saying, “There was a guy, I’m pretty sure he’s wet. He was just sitting in that minivan.” The term “wet” is a shortened version of a slur historically directed at Mexican and other Latino immigrants crossing the Rio Grande.
The text messages reveal further evidence of racial profiling. In one exchange, an agent asks, “Some of these people are stupid. Why would you post on social media that you’re wet?” Another agent responds, “Btw tonks everywhere selling food for the 4th festivities in Long Beach right now.”
The Legal Battle
The ACLU filed the lawsuit last year on behalf of several individuals who were stopped, questioned, and in some cases detained by immigration agents in the Central District of California. U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong initially issued a temporary restraining order barring stops based solely on race. However, the Supreme Court later lifted those restrictions.
The motion for preliminary injunction follows months of expedited discovery that produced internal government directives, sworn testimony, and operational records. The evidence shows that agents relied on race and ethnicity in deciding whom to stop and detain.
Mayra Joachim, deputy director of immigrants’ rights at ACLU SoCal, stated, “This filing should shock the conscience. Evidence gathered from the government has confirmed what our communities have known all along: immigration officers are flagrantly violating the law by detaining people without justification and often primarily because of the color of their skin.”
The Government’s Response
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not directly addressed the allegations of using slurs. Instead, a spokesperson stated, “Our agents are focused on protecting the American people — not entertaining performative outrage.” The spokesperson also questioned the media’s outrage for “Angel families who lost a loved one to illegal alien crime.”
The plaintiffs argue that the Constitution prohibits law enforcement from using race as a substitute for individualized suspicion. The motion alleges that the stops violated both the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection.
The court has scheduled a hearing on the motion for September 24, 2026, at 10 a.m. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for immigration enforcement practices in the United States.
