U.S. Citizen Detained Twice — Outrage Brewing!

U.S. Customs and Border Protection truck with open door.

A U.S. citizen claims federal agents tackled him twice on Alabama construction sites solely for being Latino, flashing his REAL ID ignored—yet the Department of Homeland Security insists he physically obstructed a lawful arrest.[1][2][4]

Story Snapshot

Leonardo Garcia Venegas, U.S.-born construction worker, sues over two detentions in May 2025 despite showing citizenship-proving ID.[1][4]
Lawsuit targets “Gulf of America Task Force” raids by Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice, alleging racial profiling of Latinos.[1]
Department of Homeland Security counters Venegas intervened between agents and an illegal alien, justifying his detention.[2][4]
Class action filed September 30, 2025, in U.S. District Court for Southern Alabama seeks to halt warrantless site sweeps.[1]
Case ongoing as of March 2026, with motions to dismiss pending.[1]

Lawsuit Challenges Federal Raid Policies

Leonardo Garcia Venegas filed Venegas v. Homan on September 30, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.[1] Chief Judge Jeffrey U. Beaverstock oversees the class action against White House Border Czar Tom Homan, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Attorney General Pamela Bondi, and federal agents.[1] Venegas, a Baldwin County resident born to Mexican national parents, works in construction.[1][4]

The complaint details two May 2025 incidents during Gulf of America Task Force operations.[1] Agents from Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice raided private sites without warrants.[1] Venegas alleges officers bypassed white and Black workers to detain Latinos, violating the Fourth Amendment.[1][4]

First Detention Sparks Assault Claims

In the initial raid, armed agents in camouflage entered a Baldwin County site.[1][4] Venegas claims officers targeted him after he filmed their actions.[1][2] They tackled him despite his protests of citizenship.[2] He presented a REAL ID-compliant driver’s license, issued only to citizens and lawful residents, but agents dismissed it.[1][2]

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin stated Venegas physically obstructed an agent’s arrest of an illegal alien.[2][4] He allegedly positioned himself between the agent and suspect, ignoring verbal commands.[2][4] No charges followed his release.[4]

Venegas’s attorney Jaba Tistsuashvili described one encounter as violent, with agents refusing valid ID.[3] The lawsuit lists 19 similar detentions of citizens or lawful residents.[4]

Second Incident Reinforces Profiling Allegations

Two weeks later, agents spotted Venegas at another site and detained him without suspicion.[1] He again showed his REAL ID, which agents rejected.[1][2] The complaint accuses Department of Homeland Security policies of assuming Latinos in construction are undocumented.[1]

Counts I-IV challenge official policies enabling warrantless entries and detentions.[1] Counts V-XIII pursue individual claims like assault, battery, false arrest, and Bivens actions against officers.[1] Venegas seeks injunctions, class certification, and damages.[1]

Government Defends Enforcement Amid Rising Threats

Department of Homeland Security denies arresting citizens, attributing Venegas’s detentions to obstruction.[2][4] McLaughlin emphasized agents enforce laws amid a 1000% surge in assaults post a Dallas attack on Immigration and Customs Enforcement.[2] Common sense aligns with swift action in high-risk industries like construction, rife with illegal labor.[2]

The motion for preliminary injunction argues imminent harm from demographic-based seizures.[1] Defendants filed dismissals for Federal Tort Claims Act and Administrative Procedure Act claims on January 29, 2026; a hearing awaits decision.[1] As of March 10, 2026, the case proceeds.[1]

Fourth Amendment in Immigration Crosshairs

This dispute echoes over 150 lawsuits since 2017 challenging Immigration and Customs Enforcement worksite raids for profiling.[1] Southeast cases spiked 40% post-2020.[1] Settlements often resolve claims of ignored IDs.[1] Conservatives value secure borders but demand constitutional limits on federal power—facts here favor neither side conclusively without bodycam footage or depositions.[1][2]