A Bakersfield federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to slam the brakes on stepped up immigration enforcement in California, particularly targeted at agricultural workers in California's Central Valley region.
In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Jennifer Thurston said she agreed with labor unions and other left-wing groups that border patrol agents cannot detain possible illegal immigrants without a warrant or something to back up their belief those people may be in the country illegally other than their race, skin color or job status.
Thurston delivered the ruling on April 29, granting a win to the United Farm Workers labor union and a group of migrant workers who claim they were illegally detained and deported to Mexico by U.S. Border Patrol as part of a sweeping immigration enforcement effort.
Known as "Operation Return to Sender," the immigration enforcement action began in January, shortly after President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term in office.
Trump made no secret of his intent that his administration would essentially remove restraints on border enforcement set in place by his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, which resulted in tens of millions of immigrants entering illegally into the U.S. in the preceding four years.
As part of those efforts, Border Patrol under Trump sent about 60 agents to the Central Valley, conducting sweeps in which they stopped, detained and arrested people who Border Patrol said were likely illegal immigrants.
According to court documents, much of that effort centered on questioning and detention of farm workers and day laborers in the region, many of whom Border Patrol said were shown to have entered the U.S. illegally, even if they had established lives and homes in the U.S. in the years since their entry.
In response, the UFW and others have raised an outcry against the enforcement actions, saying Border Patrol had engaged in unconstitutional arrest and detention methods. They asserted Border Patrol was largely targeting people based on their race and economic status, regardless of their actual immigration and citizenship status.
They asserted the questioning and detention actions resulted in aggressive and threatening actions, including blocking people into parking lots, aggressively questioning, seizing ID cards, deception, and smashing car windows and slashing tires on vehicles containing those who may resist or choose not to answer questions. The plaintiffs asserted Border Patrol has also used coercion to lead many to choose to leave the country or outright sent them into Mexico, wrongly leaving them stranded with no way to return.
The federal government responded to the lawsuit by asserting the court has no role in this process and no ability to tell Border Patrol and the administration how to enforce immigration law, as such enforcement remains the exclusive legal purview of the executive branch.
In her ruling, however, Judge Thurston drew a distinction between telling the administration how to manage immigration and the court stepping in to enforce legal protocols and the constitutional rights of those who may be detained.
Thurston is an appointee of former President Biden.
In her ruling, Thurston said the Border Patrol had engaged in unconstitutional detentions, as she said they had questioned and arrested people without probable cause, violating their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
In her ruling, Thurston ordered Border Patrol to cease its prior methods of stops, questioning and detention. She ordered Border Patrol to only engage in stops if agents have "reasonable suspicion that the person to be stopped is a noncitizen who is present within the United States" illegally.
She directed they must first obtain warrants for such immigration stops and arrests, unless they can establish probable cause "pre-arrest."
She ordered Border Patrol to document in detail all detention and arrests, including a narrative describing the circumstances surrounding the arrest by the arresting agents.
She further ordered that every 60 days Border Patrol would need to report to the court and to attorneys for the plaintiffs all "documentation describing Border Patrol's detentive stops and warrantless arrests" in the Eastern District of California.
The judge specifically rejected the administration's assertions that such directives amount to judicial overreach into executive branch authority, as delegated by the Constitution.
According to published reports, Customs and Border Patrol has continued to maintain Judge Thurston lacked jurisdiction, but said they have since issued new guidance and training to Border Patrol agents "detailing exactly when people may be stopped or arrested without warrants, and what rights detainees have after their arrest."