A federal judge in Los Angeles has effectively told the Department of Homeland Security to back off when it comes to people documenting immigration‑enforcement activity in the Central District of California. Under a new injunction, DHS agents are now barred from using force to push away journalists, legal observers and members of the public who are observing, recording or reporting on operations, or from deploying crowd‑control weapons against them when they are lawfully present.
U.S. District Judge Hernán D. Vera signed the order, which the ACLU of Southern California has framed as a crucial safeguard for newsgathering and public oversight of federal enforcement. The injunction, according to the group, blocks agents from dispersing people who are legally in public spaces while they monitor immigration actions, and the organization has posted the court materials online.
The case, L.A. Press Club v. Mullin, was filed in June 2025 by the Los Angeles Press Club, The NewsGuild‑CWA, three individual journalists, two community members and a legal observer. They allege that DHS agents rolled out militarized crowd‑control weapons during a series of enforcement actions across Southern California, with local coverage documenting complaints that reporters and bystanders were hit or exposed to chemical agents while covering raids and the protests that followed. MyNewsLA.
What the judge found on the ground
In written findings, Judge Vera walked through episodes in which federal officers fired pepper balls, tear gas and rubber bullets at people the court found posed no immediate threat. As summarized by Courthouse News Service, the judge described agents as having "unleashed crowd control weapons indiscriminately and with surprising savagery," citing examples from downtown Los Angeles and nearby communities.
“We are pleased with the court’s ruling,” said plaintiffs’ co‑counsel Matthew Borden, arguing that the order reins in tactics that have left both demonstrators and reporters injured. The plaintiffs are backed by a legal team that includes the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, BraunHagey & Borden, Loevy + Loevy and other civil‑rights firms. MyNewsLA.
Legal fallout and next steps
The injunction comes on the heels of a July 6 ruling in the same case that certified a class of people who observe and document DHS operations, and it lands in the middle of a broader legal fight over how federal officers police protests and press coverage. The government has pushed for stays and more limited orders in related cases, while appellate judges have aired concerns about how far district‑court injunctions should reach, according to Just Security.
For now, the order sets enforceable ground rules for DHS personnel within the Central District of California, spelling out what agents can and cannot do when facing people who are lawfully observing or reporting on immigration‑enforcement activity. Advocates say that should give reporters, legal observers and community members a bit more breathing room to stay on scene, though federal agencies still have the option to seek a stay or appeal.
The ruling is poised to influence how Southern California newsrooms cover future immigration sweeps and related demonstrations, and it highlights the role of federal courts in policing crowd‑control tactics. Journalists and civil‑liberties organizations have hailed the decision as a concrete win for press freedom and public oversight.
Officials for DHS did not offer any immediate public comment in the filings reviewed by the courts. The order, along with the documents the parties submitted leading up to it, is publicly available for anyone who wants to read the judge’s reasoning and the evidence presented in the case.
