Federal appeals court supports injunction against ICE in L.A. Press Club lawsuit

In September 2025, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) limit its use of force against journalists, observers, and peaceful protesters during its ICE raids in Southern California. It was a victory for the suit’s plaintiffs, including the L.A. Press Club, The NewsGuild-CWA, and ACLU SoCal, who claimed that attacks on journalists covering ICE protests were unconstitutional. Now, an appellate court has upheld the core findings of L.A. Press Club v. Noem and ruled in support of an injunction. In an opinion released last week, the panel of judges wrote that the plaintiffs are “likely to prevail on their First Amendment retaliation claims” because of an “avalanche” of evidence that shows DHS was acting with “retaliatory intent.” In other words, the court found that ICE officers were trying to punish the plaintiffs for exercising their First Amendment rights. “Shooting projectiles at reporters, targeting observers, and injuring demonstrators is not crowd control. It’s retaliation,” said Matt Borden, a partner with BraunHagey & Borden LLP, a firm representing the plaintiffs, in a statement about the ruling. That said, the judges also ruled that the original injunction was “overbroad in several respects” and sent the case back down to the lower courts in order to “fashion a narrower injunction.” In particular, the opinion took issue with the fact that the restrictions also “cover non-parties” attending protests in the Los Angeles area. “Here’s the takeaway: Keep recording,” said Adam Rose, the deputy director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation in an video about the ruling posted on Tuesday. “This case exists because of videos, because of photos, because people documented what was happening in real time.” A federal court recently upheld journalists’ First Amendment rights by ruling that DHS used unlawful force against reporters at LA immigration protests last year. Watch @adamrose.bsky.social explain, and if you’re a journalist facing a press freedom violation, contact @pressfreedomtracker.us. — Freedom of the Press Foundation (@freedom.press) April 7, 2026 at 11:50 AM “If you are a journalist and you can’t tell the story, you are the story,” said Rose. Among dozens of violent incidents against journalists in L.A., the original suit included evidence that ICE officers shot a journalist in the head with a rubber bullet, leading to a concussion, and hit another journalist in the arm with a tear gas canister, causing a hematoma and burns. The plaintiffs called for specific limits on ICE’s use of force, including the assault and dispersal of journalists without cause, the use of chemical and projectile weapons on members of the press, and the firing of weapons at “heads, necks, or other sensitive areas.” In the original opinion, judge Hernán Vera wrote that ICE’s actions “undoubtedly chill the media’s efforts to cover these public events and protestors seeking to express peacefully their views on national policies.” He also said that an injunction was necessary to “curtail the federal agents’ indiscriminate use of force targeting journalists standing far from any protest activity.” The Southern California suit has not only set precedent for restricting ICE’s use of force against the press, but also inspired similar legal actions by U.S. press organizations. Last summer, the Chicago Headline Club led a federal suit against DHS, citing incidents of violence against members of the press, elected officials, clergy, and peaceful protesters during ICE’s Operation Midway Blitz in the city. In November 2025, a judge issued a preliminary injunction limiting ICE’s use of force in Chicago. Soon after, Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino pulled out of the city, and the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their suit. “The retreat of DHS agents from Chicago is due in large part to the bravery of our plaintiffs and every Chicagoan who spoke up about the brutality they experienced because they exercised their First Amendment rights,” said Katie Schwartzmann, counsel at Protect Democracy, in a statement at the time. Photo by Ellen Schmidt/MinnPost/CatchLight Local/Report for America, under a Creative Commons license.