Immigration enforcement opens way for criminal defendants to avoid justice - Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles Times

by Brittny Mejia

February 24, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

Federal immigration enforcement actions are increasingly leading to the dismissal of criminal cases, raising concerns about access to justice for defendants. In a notable case, Guillermo Zambrano, a Venezuelan citizen facing serious drug trafficking charges, had his indictment dismissed after ICE detained him during President Trump’s immigration crackdown. Despite being on bail and wearing an ankle monitor, ICE removed him from his home last summer, surprising both prosecutors and defense attorneys. U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee ultimately dismissed the charges with prejudice due to ongoing violations of Zambrano’s right to pretrial release. This case highlights a broader conflict between federal prosecution priorities and immigration enforcement. Other instances include a suspect in California’s largest jewelry heist being deported while awaiting trial, leaving victims outraged and the stolen loot unrecovered. Similarly, Carlitos Ricardo Parias, a TikTok streamer charged with assault after an immigration operation, had his case dismissed when the court found he was denied access to counsel and other procedural rights while in ICE custody. These developments underscore a growing pattern where immigration detention disrupts criminal proceedings, creating challenges for defendants to receive fair trials. The situation reflects a clash of priorities between the Department of Justice, which emphasizes prosecuting crimes, and the Department of Homeland Security, focused on deportations. Federal defense attorneys argue that accessing clients in immigration detention is difficult, leading to missed deadlines and dismissed cases. Critics warn this approach prioritizes deportation over justice, potentially encouraging further criminal activity. John Targowski, a defense attorney representing Zambrano, argues that such practices could embolden criminals to commit offenses with the expectation of avoiding punishment through deportation. This issue matters because it raises concerns about fairness in the legal system and public safety. If defendants are denied their right to a fair trial or deported before their cases are resolved, justice is undermined. The dismissals also highlight inefficiencies and ethical dilemmas when immigration enforcement overrides criminal prosecution processes. As courts continue to grapple with these challenges, questions arise about whether this approach serves the broader interests of justice or merely shifts priorities toward mass deportations at the expense of accountability. Ultimately, this story sheds light on a critical intersection of immigration policy and the rule of law. The dismissals signal a need for clearer guidelines and communication between federal agencies to ensure that criminal defendants receive their constitutional rights, regardless of their immigration status. As such cases gain attention, they prompt broader discussions about the balance between immigration enforcement and justice in American society.

Verticals

newscalifornia

Originally published on Los Angeles Times on 2/24/2026