79-year-old Los Angeles car wash owner files $50 million civil-rights claim over immigration raid

A 79-year-old Los Angeles car wash owner has filed a $50 million federal civil-rights claim against the U.S. government, alleging that his rights were violated when federal agents tackled him during a Sept. 9 immigration operation at his business. Rafie Ollah Shouhed, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Iran who owns the car wash, says the injuries he suffered from the encounter include broken ribs, chest trauma, elbow injuries, and symptoms consistent with a traumatic brain injury. The claim was filed against the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Customs and Border Protection.

Surveillance video from inside the car wash shows a federal officer running through a hallway, colliding with Shouhed and knocking him to the ground before the officer moves past him. In footage from outside, Shouhed is seen approaching an officer who appears to be detaining one of his employees. The video then shows Shouhed briefly grappling with a second officer before a third officer runs in and tackles him. The claim argues that the use of force was excessive and that Shouhed was not given an opportunity to explain that his employees were legally eligible to work.

The DHS responded with a statement saying authorities arrested five people from Guatemala and Mexico during the car wash raid who “broke our nation’s immigration laws,” and that Shouhed “impeded the operation and was arrested for assaulting and impeding a federal officer.” Shouhed and his attorney, V. James DeSimone, denied the accusation at a Thursday press conference. Shouhed recalled asking the officers for a chance to show documents that would prove his workers were eligible to work in the United States: “What can I do for you? Can I help you?” He noted there is no audio on the surveillance footage, which U.S. authorities obtained as part of the operation.

DeSimone criticized the agency’s approach, saying, “This is the way ICE is operating in our community. They use physical force; they don’t speak to the people in order to ascertain who is there legally in order to do their job. Instead, they immediately resort to force.” After his detention, Shouhed said he presented his identification at the detention center and was held for 12 hours before being released without charges, according to the claim.

The claim gives a concrete timeline for the legal process: the federal agency that oversees civil-rights claims has six months to settle or deny the claim. If the government denies or does not settle, Shouhed can file a lawsuit in federal court. The case is part of a pattern of civil-rights claims tied to immigration enforcement operations in Southern California, including other U.S. citizens who have argued they were wrongly detained during raids.

One example cited in the notes is Andrea Velez, who was detained June 24 while on her way to work in downtown Los Angeles. Velez was held for two days and faced a charge for obstructing a federal officer that was ultimately dropped. The broader context includes ongoing scrutiny of how federal immigration officers conduct raids. While the Department of Homeland Security has historically defended its tactics, the agency issued a rare rebuke this week of one of its officers in New York after he shoved an Ecuadorian woman to the floor at a courthouse.

In Shouhed’s case, the focal points are the alleged use of force, the timing of the incident in the midst of a raid meant to remove people who were described by authorities as having violated immigration laws, and the procedure by which a claim of civil-rights violations is evaluated before any suit is filed. The Los Angeles car wash raid that day involved multiple officers and targeted individuals associated with the operation, according to DHS.

The civil-rights claim also underscores broader concerns about the balance between enforcing immigration laws and protecting the safety and rights of people who interact with federal agents. Advocates for immigrant communities have highlighted cases in which individuals claim they were detained or restrained without clear cause, especially when language barriers or unfamiliarity with the process complicated the officers’ ability to determine immigration status or legal eligibility to work.

Officials in the government have repeatedly maintained that civil-rights protections apply to all operations and that officers are trained to enforce the laws while following protocols designed to minimize harm. The new claim in Los Angeles adds to the ongoing discourse about how enforcement actions are conducted and how accountability is measured in incidents involving federal agents at private businesses.

As authorities consider the Shouhed claim and those of others who allege civil-rights violations, observers note the tension between deterring illegal immigration and ensuring due-process protections for individuals encountered during enforcement actions. The date of Sept. 9 marks a notable incident in Los Angeles that has drawn attention to the methods used by federal agents during raids and the potential for injuries to bystanders and business owners who become caught in the crosscurrents of enforcement activity.

The broader picture includes ongoing debates about resources, oversight, and coordination among DHS components in high-visibility enforcement operations. Critics argue that heightened enforcement, especially in urban settings with mixed immigration statuses and diverse legal backgrounds, can create friction and lead to confrontations that raise concerns about civil-rights protections. Proponents of stricter enforcement contend that the operations are necessary to uphold immigration laws and public safety, and that agents must act decisively when confronting suspected violations.

For now, Shouhed’s claim proceeds within the administrative framework that governs civil-rights complaints against federal agencies. If unresolved, the claim could open the door to litigation in federal court, where the outcome could shape future discussions about the conduct of immigration enforcement and the accountability mechanisms in place for federal officers during raids in California and beyond.