Los Angeles, CA - June 06: LAPD clear the street outside the Metropolitan Detention Center as demonstrators gather in response to ICE raids in Los Angeles on Friday, June 6, 2025 in Los Angeles, CA. (Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
Los Angeles, California – Civil rights claims and a recent federal court order have intensified scrutiny of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the Los Angeles Police Department for their conduct during a series of protests, particularly the recent anti-ICE demonstrations.
Sergio Espejo, a demonstrator injured at a protest in downtown Los Angeles on June 14, has filed a civil rights claim against both the sheriff’s department and the city. The filing alleges that deputies used flash bang devices and less-lethal munitions in a manner that was excessive and indiscriminate, leading to multiple injuries. The claim describes the incident not as an isolated act but as part of a larger pattern of disproportionate and militarized responses to peaceful protests, particularly those involving marginalized communities.
In response, the sheriff’s department emphasized its internal protocols for use-of-force incidents, noting that all deputies receive extensive training on the use of less-lethal weapons and that their deployment is subject to department oversight. Still, civil rights attorneys argue that law enforcement officers regularly ignore established guidelines and state law during crowd control efforts.
One of those attorneys, James DeSimone, is representing three individuals who allege they were seriously injured by police during an anti-ICE protest on June 8 near Los Angeles City Hall. Among them is Miguel Mendoza, who sustained facial fractures and deep lacerations after being struck by a projectile while documenting the protest. Medical treatment included stitches and ongoing care, and Mendoza has reported lasting psychological effects from the experience.
California law—specifically Assembly Bill 48, enacted in 2021—limits the use of less-lethal weapons to situations involving immediate threats and prohibits their use on vital areas such as the head or neck. However, attorneys and advocacy groups contend that officers have continued to deploy these weapons unlawfully, often without adequate warning or justification.
In the weeks following the protests, the LAPD received nearly 60 complaints related to use-of-force incidents. Press freedom organizations have also filed a federal lawsuit against the department, citing excessive force and unlawful interference with journalists covering the events. These concerns culminated in a temporary restraining order issued by a federal judge, which bars LAPD officers from targeting reporters with force or removing them from areas where they are legally permitted to be present.
The department has until July 15 to notify all officers of the court’s order, which will remain in effect until a scheduled hearing on July 24.
As community members continue to seek accountability and healing, many point to the disconnect between stated policies and real-world outcomes. Though some protest-related arrests involved serious charges, others centered on curfew violations or crowd dispersal orders. For those injured, both physically and emotionally, the consequences of the state’s approach to crowd control are likely to endure well beyond the moment.
