WG Thanks VCAA President/General Counsel Rob Roy for allowing us to share this article.

On April 29, 2025, the U.S. District Court, (Eastern District) issued an injunction restraining the Border Patrol and its agents from engaging in certain activities relative to detentions/stops and warrantless arrests of individuals located with the geographical of the Easter District Court.  This Order would apparently cover cities located in the Central Valley such as Bakersfield, Fresno, and possibly Sacramento. 

As previously reported, ACLU and the UFW, including individual plaintiffs, filed a class action lawsuit seeking injunctive relief against the Border Patrol with reference to its tactics involving 78 individuals who were unlawfully detained and/or arrested in the Bakersfield area.  It was discovered, thereafter, that 77 of the 78 individuals did not have criminal or an immigration history that was known before their arrests.

The Court’s 88-page decision divided the plaintiffs into two separate classes: 

 One class called the “suspicionless stop class” and the second was a “warrantless arrest class”.  Under the “suspicionless stop class”, the injunction prevents the Border Patrol in the Eastern District to prohibit detentive stops by Border Patrol in this District without a pre-stop, individualized assessment of reasonable suspicion whether the person is (1) engaged in an offense against the United States or (2) is a non-citizen unlawfully in the United States. 

The second “warrantless arrest class” involves all persons who have been or will be arrested in the Eastern District by Border Patrol without a warrant and without a pre-arrest, individualized assessment of probable cause that the person poses a flight risk. 

The Court also agreed to appoint the ACLU as the class counsel representing the plaintiff individuals and the UFW. 

It should be noted that this injunction is different from many of the “nationwide” injunctions that have been issued recently against the Trump Administration on a variety of other immigration-related issues. 

Nevertheless, the injunction issued against the U.S. Border Patrol that requires periodic reporting and release of documentation to plaintiff’s counsel describing Border Patrol’s detentive stops and warrantless arrests within the district, including a directive setting forth the guidance given to Border Patrol agents concerning how they should determine whether “reasonable suspicious” exists when conducting detentive stops, including vehicle stops, only applies within the Eastern District Federal Court.  Furthermore, the Court’s Order requires that within 90 days of the issuance of the Order and every 30 days thereafter, all agents associated with the El Centro Sector and those who are charged with making detentive stops and warrantless arrests in the district have to be trained and provide such documentation to the plaintiff’s counsel. 

At the very least, this Court ruling should send an extremely strong message to the U.S. Border Patrol with regard to its manner of conducting detentive stops and searches of individuals’ homes. 

Looking for additional information, tips, and best practices on preparing for ICE and DHS actions, including I-9 audits? Join Western Growers in Fresno on May 15, 2025, for our ‘Get Ready for ICE: Essential Tips for Mitigating Risk’ seminar. Register now! 

[Article Source: Ventura County Agricultural Association—Thank you to Rob Roy, VCAA President/General Counsel for the use of this article.]