Opinion: The Government’s endgame isn’t just LA, it’s the Supreme Court

As the executive director of the Los Angeles Worker Center Network, one of the plaintiffs in this landmark case, I’ve been paying close attention to what’s unfolding in court, a case poised to impact everyone in this country and potentially reshape some of the Constitution’s most significant amendments.

Earlier this month, a lower court judge issued a temporary restraining order that has all but halted the aggressive and unconstitutional operations by masked men with guns, saying they violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

At first, I chalked up the government’s weak showing to incompetence. Their case has been, by all accounts, underwhelming. More than one judge has directly questioned the strength, or lack thereof, of their arguments.

The hearing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit went well, I thought. It was clear the judges were prepared and acknowledged the serious harm being caused by the government. They even called out the contradiction in the government’s position: denying the conduct while simultaneously defending it. The panel did raise some questions for our side, mainly around standing for all plaintiffs and whether location alone can establish standing. But there's always more to the story. 

Let me explain.

Both hearings highlighted some recurring themes, but one stood out to me — the government saying they just didn’t have enough time to prepare or gather evidence. That excuse wore thin fast, with both courts. This isn’t about timing. It’s about tactical delay. They’re doing the bare minimum procedurally, just enough to check a box and show up while quietly steering this entire case toward the U.S. Supreme Court.

And why wouldn’t they? California is the perfect testing ground. The Trump administration has openly encouraged federal agencies to push constitutional boundaries, particularly when it comes to immigration. The recent political entanglements between the mayor of Los Angeles and the governor of the state notwithstanding, the message has been clear — just as California has historically set the precedent for the nation in policy and law, so too will the Trump administration seek to do the same, with the Supreme Court in hand.

This administration has repeatedly encouraged its agencies to escalate, test the limits, and show the country and the world, they’re in control. Every time judges have upheld the constitutional rights of the people, every time the courts push back, appeal, appeal, appeal. This time around, it’s no different. The goal isn’t to win in the Ninth Circuit, it’s to get a final stamp of approval from a sympathetic Supreme Court majority.

If they succeed, it won’t just be a loss for us and the other plaintiffs in this case. It will fundamentally weaken the Fourth Amendment protections for millions of people in this country. Think about what’s at stake here: ICE conducting “roving patrols” in Home Depot parking lots, car washes, street corners, anywhere they feel like fishing for someone who might be undocumented. No warrant. No probable cause. No reasonable suspicion. Just language, skin color, and location.

What’s happening in LA isn’t accidental; it’s systematic. ICE has been operating like an employee under the table, with cash in hand that keeps going till they’re caught, giving agents the green light to bypass constitutional safeguards and, when no one is looking, violate laws as needed.

And here’s the kicker: when asked point-blank whether there was a policy behind these raids, the government attorney didn’t deny it. He reminded me of the shoulders shrug emoji and simply said the record was incomplete. That’s not a legal defense; that’s called a stalling tactic. I believe this whole legal process is, in true Trump fashion, a performance, one designed to lose just enough along the way to win big at the end. And if this reaches the Supreme Court, the consequences could be devastating.

So yes, the courts matter. Yes, the Fourth Amendment still matters very much. But let’s keep it real, this is about more than just one case. It’s about whether the Constitution still applies equally to everyone, or just to those the government decides are worth protecting.

California and the people of the City of Los Angeles are on the frontlines of this fight.