The ACLU has raised concerns about the FBI’s use of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows for warrantless searches of private communications, and a recent case has highlighted the potential for abuse of this power and the need for stronger constitutional protections.
The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether geofence warrants, which compel technology companies to provide anonymized location data from devices within a defined geographic area, violate Fourth Amendment privacy rights.
The ACLU filed a lawsuit against federal immigration agents for allegedly racially profiling and violently detaining Juan Sebastián Carvajal-Muñoz during an ICE operation, violating his Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
The U.S. Border Patrol was found to have violated a court order during a July 2025 immigration operation in Sacramento, as they conducted stops without reasonable suspicion and failed to properly document their actions.
Critics argue that the lack of oversight and safeguards in the DHS’s arrest practices creates risks of prolonged detention, mistakes and harm caused by inadequately trained officers, and violates the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The ACLU and several other organizations have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to declare geofence warrants unconstitutional, arguing that the increasingly used investigative tool violates the Fourth Amendment and amounts to a sweeping digital dragnet.
The Brennan Center for Justice is urging Congress to enact common-sense reforms to restore oversight, protect constitutional rights, and curb abuses within the Department of Homeland Security, as key accountability mechanisms have been eroded and First and Fourth Amendment protections have been violated.
The family of Victor Lopez, an 18-year-old who was fatally shot by Santa Ana police during a traffic stop, has filed a civil rights claim against the city alleging excessive force and a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The California Lawyers Association has raised concerns about recent federal immigration enforcement practices, which it says may violate constitutional protections and civil liberties, and has called for courts and oversight institutions to ensure independent review of such actions.
Federal immigration officers are now asserting new authority to forcibly enter homes without a warrant signed by a judge, despite a federal judge ruling such conduct unconstitutional after a family’s home was broken into with only an administrative warrant.
A ProPublica investigation has found that ICE has repeatedly arrested American citizens, misreported those arrests, and disregarded constitutional protections, raising concerns about unchecked federal power and government accountability.
Pamela Wridt and Robert Sauve are suing the City of New York over the NYPD’s expanding use of surveillance cameras, alleging that the city’s practices violate constitutional protections for privacy, free speech, and association.
Millions of drivers are pulled over every year for minor violations, which rarely make roads safer and instead lead to racial disparities, violence, and loss of trust in police, prompting the ACLU to work to restore people’s rights on the road by limiting or ending traffic stops for issues unrelated to road safety.
UC Davis law professors Vikram David Amar and Alan E. Brownstein published an analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo, which allowed ICE to use race and other demographic factors in selecting individuals for immigration investigation, and criticized Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion for relying on the controversial Los Angeles v. Lyons decision and for equating race with other demographic factors.
The California Public Defenders Association has denounced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Noem v. Perdomo, which allows federal agents to use race, ethnicity, accent, location and occupation as grounds for detaining individuals, effectively permitting racial profiling of Black and Brown individuals suspected of immigration violations.
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to lift a temporary order barring federal immigration agencies from conducting certain types of stops in Los Angeles and surrounding counties, a move which has drawn strong opposition from the ACLU of Southern California.
Mike Fox of the Cato Institute has argued that ICE’s detention and border enforcement practices, enabled by Supreme Court decisions, violate individual privacy rights and expand government power in ways the Constitution’s framers sought to prevent.
A Sacramento lawsuit challenging police violence during the 2020 George Floyd protests has resulted in a monetary settlement, but the court refused to impose lasting injunctive relief, leaving the plaintiffs and advocates frustrated and vulnerable to repeat abuse.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of 18 states have filed an amicus brief to halt aggressive ICE and CBP immigration raids in Los Angeles, citing constitutional violations and harm to public safety and the economy.
WOODLAND, CA – A judge here last in Yolo County Superior Court Friday denied a defense motion…