Federal judge halts warrantless ICE raids on Alabama construction sites after citizen detained three times

A federal judge in Mobile, Alabama, has ordered a temporary halt to three immigration-enforcement practices used by federal agents on private construction sites, ruling that a U.S. citizen who says he was detained three separate times despite showing valid identification is likely to succeed on his claim that the tactics violate the Fourth Amendment.

Chief U.S. District Judge Jeffrey U. Beaverstock issued the order Monday in Garcia Venegas v. Homan, a proposed class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. The order bars agents, for now, from entering private construction sites without a warrant, detaining workers without individualized suspicion, and continuing to hold someone after they produce valid government identification.

What the order does

The stay stops short of the full preliminary injunction the plaintiff had sought, which Beaverstock called "a drastic and extraordinary remedy" better reserved for cases with a clearer, more immediate showing of irreparable harm. Instead, he found the plaintiff, Leonardo "Leo" Garcia Venegas, is "likely to succeed" on his Fourth Amendment and Administrative Procedure Act claims and that the challenged practices should be paused while the case proceeds toward trial. "The nature of the worksite does not open the floodgates to warrantless government intrusion," Beaverstock wrote in his order, adding that the government's position "defies reason" and that a policy of continuing to detain someone after they show valid identification "is likely to run afoul of the Fourth Amendment."

Garcia Venegas, a Florida-born concrete and construction worker in Baldwin County, Alabama, is the named plaintiff, represented by the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit public-interest law firm that specializes in constitutional litigation. According to the complaint filed in federal court, he was detained by masked, armed officers on three separate occasions over roughly a year. In May 2025, officers jumped a fence at a construction site in Foley, Alabama, and tackled him and his brother while he was filming the encounter. Weeks later, agents entered a partially built home on another site without permission and detained him again. In May 2026, he says he was pulled from his car and tackled outside his own driveway. Each time, according to the complaint, officers initially rejected his Alabama REAL ID as fraudulent before releasing him once a records check confirmed his citizenship.

The numbers

The lawsuit, filed in September 2025, names border czar Tom Homan, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pamela Bondi as defendants over what the complaint describes as a coordinated enforcement operation at construction sites across Baldwin County, including in Foley, Fairhope and Silverhill. The complaint alleges that non-Latino workers present at the same sites during the same encounters were not stopped or questioned. Beaverstock's order followed a September 3 ruling that had already denied the government's motion to dismiss the case entirely, a step the Institute for Justice called "an important first step" toward a full trial on the merits.

"For the first time in a long time, I will be able to go to work without worrying that I will be arrested," Garcia Venegas said after Monday's ruling.

How we got here

The case is one of a growing number of legal challenges to the pace and tactics of immigration-worksite enforcement, which has expanded over the past two years to include more frequent operations at construction sites, meatpacking plants and agricultural operations as part of a broader push to increase interior arrests nationwide. Central to Garcia Venegas's claim is testimony from the government's own witness: a Homeland Security Investigations supervisor who, under questioning, said he was unaware of any policy authorizing warrantless entry onto construction sites or continued detention of someone after they produce identification, and testified that agents are trained to need reasonable suspicion or probable cause before detaining a person. Institute for Justice attorneys argued that testimony undercut the government's own defense of its practices in court.

"The government stood up in court and argued that they don't need warrants to enter private construction sites, round up all the workers, and refuse to accept government-issued IDs," said Institute for Justice senior attorney Jared McClain. Government lawyers had countered that agents act on a case-by-case basis and that construction sites, as semi-public workplaces, carry a reduced expectation of privacy — an argument Beaverstock rejected in his order.

Who is affected

Beaverstock's order directly protects Garcia Venegas while the case proceeds, but its practical reach could extend further. The suit is styled as a proposed class action on behalf of other workers subjected to similar stops in the district, though the judge has not yet ruled on whether to certify that broader class. Immigration attorneys tracking the case say a final ruling upholding the Fourth Amendment theory could reshape how agents approach worksite operations well beyond Alabama, since the legal reasoning — that a construction site is still private property requiring a warrant, and that valid identification ends reasonable suspicion — is not unique to this district. The government retains the right to appeal to the Eleventh Circuit, and has not indicated publicly whether it will do so.

What happens next

The stay remains in effect while litigation continues. Both sides are expected to proceed toward discovery and, eventually, trial on the underlying constitutional and statutory claims, including Garcia Venegas's request for damages and a permanent injunction. The Institute for Justice has said it intends to press for class certification covering other workers who say they were stopped under the same practices. For now, Garcia Venegas said he plans to keep working in Baldwin County. "Americans cannot be stopped and held by law enforcement when they are doing nothing wrong," he said. "I'm glad my case is moving forward, and I hope it can make lasting change."