Key points:
- Court settlement restricts ICE officers in Southern California.
- ICE officers cannot impersonate local law enforcement or use deceptive tactics.
- ICE officers must now document their actions during home enforcement actions.
LOS ANGELES – A court settlement approved this week in Kidd v. Noem has placed sweeping restrictions on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, prohibiting them from impersonating local law enforcement or using deceptive tactics during home arrests in Southern California.
The case, brought on behalf of a class of individuals targeted in such raids, marks a major legal victory for immigrant rights organizations and reaffirms constitutional protections against unlawful government intrusion.
Under the terms of the agreement, ICE officers in the Los Angeles Field Office are no longer permitted to falsely identify themselves as members of state or local law enforcement agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department, probation or parole officers, detectives, or other non-federal entities.
The officers are also prohibited from misrepresenting their purpose when attempting to enter a home or lure residents outside. The settlement was approved by U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II as part of a class action lawsuit originally filed in 2020.
The lawsuit was brought by Osny Sorto-Vazquez Kidd, along with two leading immigrant rights organizations: the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice (ICIJ) and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA). Representing the class, they alleged that ICE’s tactics during home enforcement operations violated constitutional rights by using ruses to bypass the need for judicial warrants and consent.
“Our vibrant communities are built on trust. This settlement makes clear immigration officers are not above the Constitution and will be held accountable for their deceptive practices,” said Diana Sanchez, a staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, which served as co-counsel in the case. “We’ll be monitoring to ensure ICE does not violate the rights of our community members.”
The agreement imposes new rules prohibiting ICE officers from making false claims about their mission. They are barred from stating that they are conducting criminal investigations, that there are safety or legal issues involving the resident’s vehicle, or that there is a threat to public safety. They also cannot claim to be searching for someone else or conducting a probation or parole check unless it is an immigration parole check and they have legal authority to do so.
Angelica Salas, executive director of CHIRLA, emphasized the broader implications of the agreement. “At a time when roving patrols of masked federal agents have illegally been disappearing people and separating families on our own streets, a home must be protected,” Salas said. “By prohibiting ICE agents from using trickery—for example, falsely claiming that there is an issue with a resident’s vehicle—to lure people out of their homes, this settlement protects all its occupants and creates a safer community.”
The settlement also addresses visual identification. ICE officers conducting residential enforcement must wear visible placards or clothing that clearly identify them as ICE. If the word “POLICE” is used on clothing or equipment, the word “ICE” must be equally prominent or larger. This provision aims to end confusion that often arises when federal agents intentionally appear to be local police.
“For far too long, ICE disrespected the privacy of community members by taking shortcuts around the Constitution’s requirement that law enforcement have a warrant signed by a judge to enter a home,” said Annie Lai, director of the Immigrant and Racial Justice Solidarity Clinic at UC Irvine School of Law. “Thanks to this settlement, ICE must now be transparent about who they are if they don’t have a warrant and want to speak with someone at their home. These protections could not come at a better time.”
The L.A. Field Office, which is subject to the settlement, covers the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo. In addition to changing how ICE officers present themselves and engage with residents, the settlement includes several oversight mechanisms. ICE must issue a broadcast message to all officers in the Los Angeles Field Office outlining their obligations under the agreement. The agency must also revise training materials and conduct regular trainings—at least three per year—on the requirements.
Officers are now required to document specific details during residential enforcement actions, including how they verbally identified themselves and what purpose they stated. These records will be reviewed by supervisors, and ICE must provide class counsel with semiannual arrest activity reports, as well as copies of Form I-213s and field operation worksheets upon request. This documentation and monitoring will continue for a three-year period.
“This is a long overdue victory for our communities across the Inland Empire and beyond,” said Lizbeth Abeln, deputy director at ICIJ. “For years, we’ve heard the testimonies: ICE agents impersonating local police, showing up at people’s doors, lying about their purpose, and using fear to tear families apart. ICE can no longer use deception to target our communities. There’s more work to do, but this proves that ICE will no longer get away with their racist and harmful tactics.”
The settlement follows a separate court order in May 2024, which ruled that ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents may not enter the private area surrounding a home, known as the “curtilage,” without a judicial warrant or consent, if their intent is to conduct a warrantless arrest. Together, the court rulings provide robust legal protections for individuals and families at risk of immigration enforcement at home.
“The combination of this settlement agreement in conjunction with the court’s May 2024 ‘knock and arrest’ ruling curbs ICE’s deceptive home arrest practices and provides meaningful relief to the classes and the broader Southern California community,” said Giovanni Saarman González, a partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, which also served as counsel in the case.
The legal team representing the plaintiffs included attorneys from the ACLU of Southern California, Munger Tolles & Olson LLP, and the UC Irvine School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic.
Individuals who believe they have experienced a deceptive home enforcement encounter by ICE are encouraged to submit an intake form to class counsel. Community members can also access educational materials on their rights during home immigration enforcement through the ACLU of Southern California’s ICE Is Not Welcome Here campaign.
The full settlement agreement is available online here (PDF).
