logo
Most nabbed in L.A. raids were men with no criminal conviction, picked up off the street

Most nabbed in L.A. raids were men with no criminal conviction, picked up off the street

Yahoo4 hours ago

As Los Angeles became the epicenter of President Trump's crackdown on undocumented immigrants, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem flew to the city and held a news conference, saying the government's objective was to "bring in criminals that have been out on our street far too long."
But data from the days leading up to that June 12 appearance suggest a majority of those who were arrested were not convicted criminals. Most were working-age men, nearly half Mexican.
From June 1 to 10, Immigration and Customs Enforcement data show that early in the crackdown 722 were arrested in the Los Angeles region. The figures were obtained by the Deportation Data Project, a repository of enforcement data at UC Berkeley Law.
A Times analysis found that 69% of those arrested during that period had no criminal conviction and 58% had never been charged with a crime. The median age of someone arrested was 38, and that person was likely to be a man. Nearly 48% were Mexican, 16% were from Guatemala and 8% from El Salvador.
"They're not going after drug kingpins, they're chasing hardworking people through swap meets and Home Depot parking lots," Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass told The Times. "You can see the impact of these random raids everywhere in our city — families are scared to go eat at restaurants, kids are scared their parents aren't going to return from the store — the fear is there because they've seen videos of people being shoved into unmarked vans by masked men refusing to identify themselves."
While the Trump administration has been pounding the point that they are targeting the "worst of the worst," several data sets released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in recent days show that percentage of people picked up without a criminal conviction is growing as sweeps become the norm in Los Angeles.
The data cover a seven-county area from San Luis Obispo in the north to Orange County in the south. Experts told The Times the data confirm what many advocates and officials say: that most of the arrests carried out are on the street. Many were executed in open air locations, like car washes, Home Depot parking lots and street vending spots. Immigrant advocates and local officials say the lack of named targets shows the federal agents are simply racially profiling, allegations that Los Angeles officials are using to lay the groundwork for a lawsuit.
Department of Homeland Security officials say the efforts are targeted.
'DHS enforcement operations are highly targeted, and officers do their due diligence," said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. "We know who we are targeting ahead of time. If and when we do encounter individuals subject to arrest, our law enforcement is trained to ask a series of well-determined questions to determine status and removability.'
Nationally, the number of people arrested without criminal convictions has jumped significantly and many of those with convictions are nonviolent offenders, according to nonpublic data obtained by the Cato Institute that covers the 2025 fiscal year beginning in Oct. 1 and ending June 15.
"ICE is not primarily detaining people who are public safety threats," said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. "Serious violent offenders are a very small minority, just 7% of the people that it's taking into custody."
ICE has not released data on criminal records of detainees booked into its custody. But Cato's nonpublic data showed about 9 out of 10 had never been convicted of a violent or property crime and 30% have no criminal record. The most frequent crimes are immigration and traffic offenses.
"That's important because the Department of Homeland Security has made such a big deal about its deportation efforts being focused on people with serious criminal histories," he said.
He also analyzed the UC Berkeley Law data that reflects ICE arrests and found that nationally, five times the number of immigrants without criminal convictions were arrested in the last fiscal year compared with the same period in 2017. He called the figure "staggering." For June alone, he noted that the agency arrested 6,000 people without criminal convictions.
McLaughlin said Monday that "75% of those arrests under this Administration have been of illegal aliens with criminal convictions or pending charges."
The public data reveal that figure is 70% over the course of Trump's second term, but lower in recent weeks.
That data show ICE has booked 204,297 people into detention facilities over the last fiscal year. The figure is considered a good approximation for arrests.
Of those, a week before Trump took office for the second time, 38% of those booked had not been convicted of a crime. Five months into his term, that number had grown to 63%.
Cato's nonpublic data show that the top criminal conviction is immigration followed by a traffic offenses, assaults and drug charges.
Bier pins the shift to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who in May reportedly directed top ICE officials to go beyond target lists and begin arresting people at Home Depots or 7-Eleven convenience stores.
The wider sweeps are stressing the capacity of the detention system, where detainees have reported moldy food, dirty towels and no changes of clothes for more than a week at a time.
A week before Trump took office, there were about 39,000 people held in detention. By June 15, that figure had grown 42% to 56,397.
"It's nearing a historical high," said Austin Kocher, an assistant professor at Syracuse University who tracks immigration data.
And that figure could grow. The administration has asked Congress to fund 100,000 detention beds.
Times staff writer Andrea Castillo and data and graphics journalists Lorena Elebee and Sean Greene contributed to this report.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Wisconsin Supreme Court sides with Republican Legislature in fight with governor
Wisconsin Supreme Court sides with Republican Legislature in fight with governor

Associated Press

time24 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Wisconsin Supreme Court sides with Republican Legislature in fight with governor

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court handed a victory to the Republican-controlled Legislature on Wednesday in a power struggle with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. The court, in a unanimous ruling where the four liberal justices joined with three conservatives, struck down Evers' partial veto of a Republican bill in a case that tested both the limits of his broad veto powers and the Legislature's ability to exert influence by controlling funding. The court also ruled that the Legislature can put money for certain state programs into an emergency fund under the control of its budget committee. Evers had argued such a move was unconstitutional. The ruling against Evers comes after the court earlier this year upheld Evers' partial veto that locked in a school funding increase for 400 years. The court last year issued a ruling that reined in some powers of the Legislature's budget committee, while this ruling went the other way. Evers clashes with Legislature Evers, in his seventh year as governor, has frequently clashed with the Legislature and often used his broad veto powers to kill their proposals. Republican lawmakers have tried to take control away from the governor's office by placing money to fund certain programs and state agencies in an emergency fund controlled by the Legislature's budget committee. That gives the Legislature significant influence over that funding and the implementation of certain programs within the executive branch. Evers argued that the Legislature is trying to limit his partial veto power and illegally control how the executive branch spends money. The state Supreme Court on Wednesday disagreed. It ruled that Evers improperly used his partial veto on a bill that detailed the plan for spending on new literacy programs designed to improve K-12 students' reading performance. The court also sided with the Legislature and said the budget committee can legally put money into an emergency fund to be distributed later. That is what it has done with the $50 million for the literacy program. Evers and Republican lawmakers did not immediately return messages seeking comment. Fight over literacy funding In 2023, Evers signed into law a bill that created an early literacy coaching program within the state Department of Public Instruction. The bill also created grants for schools that adopt approved reading curricula to pay for changing their programs and to train teachers on the new practices. However, Republicans put the $50 million to pay for the new initiative in a separate emergency fund controlled by the Legislature's budget committee. That money remains in limbo amid disagreements about how the money would be used and who would decide how to spend it. Evers argued that the Legislature didn't have the power to withhold the money and the court should order it to be released to the education department. The Legislature has been increasing the amount of money it puts in the emergency fund that it can release at its discretion, but it remains a small percentage of the total state budget. In the last budget, about $230 million was in the fund, or about half of a percentage point of the entire budget. Republicans sue to stop veto Evers used his partial veto power on another bill that created the mechanism for spending the $50 million for the new program. He argued that his changes would simplify the process and give DPI more flexibility. Evers also eliminated grants for private voucher and charter schools. Republican legislators sued, contending that the governor illegally used his partial veto power. State law allows only for a partial veto of bills that spend money. For all other bills, the governor must either sign or veto them in their entirety. Because the bill Evers partially vetoed was a framework for spending, but didn't actually allocate any money, his partial vetoes were unconstitutional, lawmakers argued. Evers argued for a liberal interpretation of his veto powers. He said that by challenging it, the Legislature was trying to weaken his powers. A Dane County judge sided with Evers, determining that the bill in question qualified as an appropriations bill subject to partial vetoes. But in a win for the Legislature, he did not find fault with the Legislature's budget committee putting funding for the program under its control. The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed with the lower court that putting the money into the emergency fund was legal. But the court also said Evers' veto was illegal.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store