U.S. Representative Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24) joined Representatives Juan Vargas (D-CA-52), Darren Soto (D-FL-09), and over 64 of their colleagues in demanding answers from the Trump Administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on the use of racial profiling in immigration enforcement.
Under the Fourth Amendment, federal agents generally may not stop someone unless agents have good reason to suspect they're breaking laws. But a growing number of people — many of them Latino — have reported being targeted, harassed, and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents solely because of their race.
In July, a federal judge issued an order that stopped ICE from targeting people based on race, language, and work. However, this week the Supreme Court temporarily lifted the order while the case continues. As a result, ICE agents can resume making indiscriminate stops for the time being, underscoring the need for immediate answers and accountability from DHS on the use of racial profiling in immigration enforcement.
“We have been concerned by recent statements and actions undertaken by DHS that seem to indicate that the Department is unlawfully using race as a basis for conducting immigration enforcement operations,” wrote the lawmakers. “A strategy of immigration enforcement that singles out law-abiding people solely because of their race is at odds with our constitution’s commitment to both equality and freedom from unreasonable searches.”
Earlier this year, White House Border Czar Tom Homan stated in an interview that ICE agents “don’t need probable cause” to detain people and can instead rely on “observations… based on their location, their occupation, their physical appearance, their actions.”
“These kinds of indiscriminate, race-based detentions cause real harm,” the lawmakers continued. “In June, DHS conducted a worksite raid at a farm in Ventura County, California, where militarized agents violently detained hundreds of people, allegedly including U.S. citizens and those with work visas. As a result of the raid, Jaime Alanis, a farmworker at the farm, fell from a greenhouse and later died due to his injuries. In Los Angeles, ICE snatched Andrea Velez, a U.S. citizen, off the street, and detained her for two days, giving her nothing to drink for 24 hours. A U.S. citizen in Pico Rivera was assaulted and detained by agents in a Walmart parking lot.”
ICE data shows that between January 20 and July 28, 2025, ICE made more than 16,000 street arrests of immigrants with no criminal convictions, charges or removal orders. Over half of these arrests were made between June and July alone, with Latinos accounting for 90% of the arrests, meaning that nearly one in five arrests made by ICE is a Latino with no criminal history.
Read the full letter HERE and below:
Secretary Noem:
We write in response to recent incidents that have raised questions about the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s use of race in immigration enforcement. Recent statements and actions undertaken by Department officials have called into question whether stop and arrest decisions are being made based not on legitimate law enforcement reasons but on unconstitutional racial bias.
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. This guarantee generally prevents the government from treating people differently based on their race without a compelling reason that is “narrowly tailored.” The Fourth Amendment similarly prevents the government from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures, including searches without a warrant or probable cause. It is well established that these limitations extend to the conduct of immigration law enforcement officers. Away from the border, immigration agents can only make a stop when they have identified “specific articulable facts, together with rational inferences from those facts, that reasonably warrant suspicion” that the person is violating immigration law.
Given these well-established limitations, we have been concerned by recent statements and actions undertaken by DHS that seem to indicate that the Department is unlawfully using race as a basis for conducting immigration enforcement operations.
In July, Border Czar Tom Homan stated in an interview that “people need to understand ICE officers and Border Patrol don’t need probable cause to walk up to somebody, briefly detain them, and question them . . . based on their physical appearance.” As you know, to conduct a warrantless arrest, an immigration agent needs to establish probable cause that the person targeted is not only violating an immigration law or regulation, but also that they pose a flight risk. And even for a brief detention, immigration agents need reasonable suspicion. Mr. Homan’s statement seems to indicate that it is the policy of this administration that immigration agents can satisfy those requirements based solely on someone’s physical features and what they may mean about their racial identity. ICE data shows that between January 20 and July 28, 2025, ICE made more than 16,000 street arrests of immigrants with no criminal convictions, charges, or removal orders. Over half of these arrests were made between June and July alone, with Latinos accounting for 90% of arrests. This means that nearly one in five arrests made by ICE is a Latino with no criminal history.
Similar concerns prompted the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to order the Trump Administration to halt its practice of racial profiling in immigration enforcement. This summer, Judge Frimpong found that the Administration has engaged in a pattern of stops and arrests based on four impermissible factors, including a person’s “apparent race or identity.” The judge made this finding after the Administration was unable to provide details that supported their claim that the stops and arrests —including the arrest of U.S. Citizens— were based on actual “intelligence” or an “investigation” that indicated they were breaking the law. Without additional information, Judge Frimpong explained that it was improper to base arrests on these factors, including racial identity, because they were “no more indicative of illegal presence in the country than of legal presence.” On September 8, 2025, the Supreme Court temporarily lifted this order as the case is appealed, allowing immigration enforcement officers to continue to make indiscriminate stops based on racial factors for the time being. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that through its use of indiscriminate stops“[t]he Government…has all but declared that all Latinos, U.S. citizens or not, who work low wage jobs are fair game to be seized at any time.”
These kinds of indiscriminate, race-based detentions cause real harm. In June, DHS conducted a worksite raid at a farm in Ventura County, California, where militarized agents violently detained hundreds of people, allegedly including U.S. citizens and those with work visas. As a result of the raid, Jaime Alanis, a farmworker at the farm, fell from a greenhouse and later died due to his injuries. In Los Angeles, ICE snatched Andrea Velez, a U.S. citizen, off the street, and detained her for two days, giving her nothing to drink for 24 hours. A U.S. citizen in Pico Rivera was assaulted and detained by agents in a Walmart parking lot.
Two U.S. citizens in Montebello were forcefully interrogated by Border Patrol agents on the street about their citizenship, one was later taken to a detention center. Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez, a U.S. citizen, was detained by Florida authorities and charged with entering the country as an “unauthorized alien,” and was detained in county jail for more than 24 hours. In Arizona, Jose Hermosillo, a 19-year-old U.S. citizen, was wrongfully detained for 10 days.
Such a pattern of apparent discrimination is even more concerning given that the Department gutted the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL), which would normally investigate complaints regarding the violations of civil rights. According to whistleblowers, when the Department initially moved to shutter the office, it halted over 500 civil rights investigations. Without a robust CRCL, it will be difficult for those whose rights have been violated by ICE to obtain relief through any avenue other than the court system.
A strategy of immigration enforcement that singles out law-abiding people solely because of their race is at odds with our constitution’s commitment to both equality and freedom from unreasonable searches. Accordingly, we ask for the following information by September 30th, 2025:
- Does the Department have a policy on how immigration officers can use race in making determinations about when to stop or arrest someone? If so, what is the policy?
- Does the Department agree with Border Czar Homan’s statement that “ICE officers and Border Patrol don’t need probable cause to walk up to somebody, briefly detain them, and question them . . . based on their physical appearance”?
- Mr. Sean Skedzielewski, an attorney for the government, has been quoted as saying that the “Department of Homeland Security has policy and training to ensure compliance with the Fourth Amendment.” Please provide copies of all related training materials and any training materials that address racial profiling, discrimination or bias.
- What steps has the Department taken to ensure that agents are upholding protections against racial profiling provided by the U.S. Constitution, including the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause?
- Since January 20, 2025, how many complaints have been filed with the Department alleging that an arrest or stop was based on race?
- During that same time frame, what actions has the Department taken to respond to complaints that an immigration enforcement action was unlawfully motivated by race?
- How has the Department’s gutting of the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties affected its ability to respond to such complaints?
- What is the Department’s policy regarding how it responds to an allegation that a stop or arrest was unlawfully undertaken based on race?
- When the agency determines that a stop or arrest was improperly motivated by race, what steps does the Department take in response? How does the Department ensure that there is accountability?
We look forward to receiving your prompt response.
