A Downtown Los Angeles tattoo artist says his life and livelihood were knocked off course when a law-enforcement projectile hit him from behind as he walked away from a June 9, 2025 immigration protest. In a new lawsuit, he claims the impact left him with prolonged pain, anxiety, and lost earnings that cut into his ability to work as a tattooer.
According to MyNewsLA, the plaintiff, identified as Azize Ngo, has sued the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County and the State of California in Los Angeles Superior Court. The complaint alleges assault, battery, negligence and civil-rights violations and says officers with the LAPD, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol were all using less-lethal launchers that day, while not specifying which agency fired the round that struck Ngo.
How The June Protests Unfolded
Protests that began in early June 2025 over workplace immigration raids grew into several days of confrontations in and around downtown Los Angeles, as police, county deputies and some federal personnel cleared streets using crowd-control munitions. The Los Angeles Times and other outlets documented officers firing rubber and foam rounds and reported on curfews, arrests and property damage.
Journalists And Use-of-Force Questions
Coverage of those demonstrations also showed multiple journalists and other media workers struck by impact rounds and chemical agents, a pattern that sparked outrage from press-freedom advocates and calls for accountability. The Guardian and industry groups documented reporters being hit on camera, while organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists warned that aggressive crowd-control tactics were interfering with newsgathering.
Why The Case Lands Now
Ngo’s lawsuit arrives as other cases over force used at those protests work their way through the courts. On July 13, 2026, a federal judge issued an injunction that limits the Department of Homeland Security’s use of force against journalists and observers in the Central District of California. City News Service reported that order, which plaintiffs say responds to a year of injuries and legal challenges tied to last summer’s demonstrations.
What Ngo Says He Lost
According to the complaint, Ngo and others were struck in the upper legs while walking away from officers and experienced what the filing calls "excruciating and prolonged pain" that disrupted their sleep and daily activities. MyNewsLA reports that Ngo is alleging lost earnings and is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, and the lawsuit says those injured developed anxiety and nightmares.
Legal Outlook
The case blends state tort claims with federal civil-rights allegations that typically invoke Section 1983 and municipal-liability rules, which means Ngo will have to connect any alleged constitutional violations to official policy, custom or a failure to train. Legal overviews note that Section 1983 suits often run into defenses such as qualified immunity and the demanding standard for so-called Monell claims, and summaries of the statute and key case law describe the practical hurdles for plaintiffs. Justia offers a plain-language guide to Section 1983 and municipal liability.
The lawsuit is pending in Los Angeles Superior Court, and it is not yet clear when the defendants will formally respond or whether they will seek to move the case to federal court. Ngo’s filing joins a run of recent lawsuits and an evolving injunction landscape that together are likely to influence how Los Angeles handles questions of crowd-control tactics and accountability going forward.
