Immigration Lawsuit Challenges Warrantless Arrests in NC

Five North Carolina residents filed a federal class-action lawsuit in February 2026 challenging warrantless immigration arrests carried out across the state by the Department of Homeland Security and its enforcement agencies. The case, Aceituno v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, was filed on February 24, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, and asks the court to declare the government’s arrest practices unlawful and permanently block them.¹

Who Filed the Lawsuit and What They Say Happened

Four of the five named plaintiffs are U.S. citizens. The fifth holds a U visa, a status granted to crime victims who cooperate with law enforcement. All say federal agents arrested them without a warrant and without any individualized reason to believe they were removable.

Willy Wender Aceituno, 46, a naturalized citizen who has lived in Charlotte for more than 25 years, alleges agents smashed his truck window and handcuffed him minutes after a different group of officers had already confirmed his citizenship. He was released without charges.²
Yoshi Cuenca Villamar, 23, a citizen born in North Carolina, alleges he was tackled while working as a landscaper.²
Ruben Arguera Lopez, 39, a cook and U visa holder, has lived in Charlotte for 15 years.³
Edwin Godinez, 29, a citizen born in California, has lived in Spencer for seven years.³
Yair Alexander Napoles, 22, Godinez’s brother, is a citizen born in North Carolina and living in Salisbury. He and Godinez were arrested together in January 2026 without being questioned about immigration status.²

The complaint describes the pattern as “detain-first, justify-later,” alleging that agents in Charlotte, Durham, and Raleigh grabbed people in streets, workplaces, and parking lots based on appearance or language, then released them only after confirming they were citizens or lawfully present.⁴ Advocacy groups Siembra NC and El Pueblo say they documented numerous incidents, some captured on video by neighbors.²

The Legal Standard at the Center of the Case

Federal immigration law lets officers arrest someone without a warrant only if they have probable cause to believe the person is removable and “likely to escape” before a warrant can be obtained.⁵ For years, ICE read “likely to escape” as flight risk: whether the person was unlikely to appear for future proceedings.

On January 28, 2026, acting ICE director Todd Lyons signed an internal memorandum calling that reading “unreasoned” and “incorrect.” The memo redefined the standard as whether the person is “unlikely to remain at the scene” of an encounter with agents. It listed seven factors officers could weigh, including whether the person was inside a vehicle, refused commands, or had admitted to entering the country illegally.⁵⁶

Critics say the new definition is almost impossible to fail: anyone an officer approaches on a street or in a parking lot could be labeled “unlikely to remain at the scene,” which in practice authorizes sweeps and collateral arrests rather than targeted enforcement of pre-obtained warrants.⁶ The North Carolina complaint argues that agents applying this standard have violated both the Fourth Amendment and the federal statute governing warrantless immigration arrests.

Who Is Being Sued and What the Plaintiffs Want

The defendants include DHS, ICE, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the U.S. Border Patrol, together with DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, CBP Commissioner Rodney S. Scott, Border Patrol Chief Michael W. Banks, acting ICE director Todd Lyons, and Atlanta ICE Field Office Director Sean Gallagher.⁷ District Judge Susan C. Rodriguez is presiding, with Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf handling referred matters.⁸

The plaintiffs ask the court for two things: a declaration that DHS’s warrantless arrest policy is unlawful, and a permanent injunction barring the agencies from conducting warrantless immigration arrests in North Carolina without individualized probable cause.¹ They also seek class-action status on behalf of everyone in North Carolina who has been or could be subjected to the same practice.⁷

Plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU of North Carolina, the national ACLU, Democracy Forward, and the Southern Coalition for Social Justice.¹

Where the Case Stands

DHS initially called the allegations “categorically false” and said its operations were constitutional. Government lawyers have pointed to a September 2025 U.S. Supreme Court emergency order tied to Los Angeles immigration enforcement, which they say allowed similar tactics to continue during litigation.²

On June 8, 2026, U.S. attorneys filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing because they cannot show a “substantial risk of being arrested again.”⁹ As of mid-2026, Judge Rodriguez had not ruled on the motion, and the court had not decided whether to certify the case as a class action.¹⁰ No preliminary injunction is in place in North Carolina, so warrantless arrests under the Lyons standard have not been blocked in the state by this case.

How This Case Compares to Rulings Elsewhere

Federal courts in two other jurisdictions have already blocked similar practices, and the North Carolina plaintiffs cite those rulings in their filings.

In Washington, D.C., a federal court granted a preliminary injunction in December 2025 in Escobar Molina v. DHS, barring warrantless immigration arrests in the District without a pre-arrest probable cause determination that the person would escape. The court certified a provisional class and, in May 2026, granted a motion to enforce the injunction, ordering agents not to rely on the analysis in the Lyons memo.¹¹

In Oregon, U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai issued a preliminary injunction on February 4, 2026, in M-J-M-A v. Wamsley, blocking warrantless arrests statewide. The Oregon plaintiffs said ICE had run an operation called “Operation Black Rose” using geographic targeting and daily arrest quotas instead of individualized warrants. “Due process calls for those who have great power to exercise great restraint,” Judge Kasubhai wrote.¹²

Those orders bind DHS only in the districts that issued them. They do not restrict federal agents operating in North Carolina.

The Enforcement Surge That Set Off the Case

Between January 20 and October 15, 2025, ICE arrested roughly 3,300 people in North Carolina, more than double the total for all of 2024. At least 615 of those arrested in 2025 had no criminal convictions, nearly twice the prior year’s figure.¹³

The surge peaked on November 15, 2025, when Customs and Border Protection launched “Operation Charlotte’s Web” in Charlotte and the Research Triangle, led by CBP commander-at-large Greg Bovino.¹⁴ By early December, the operation had produced more than 425 arrests.¹⁵ The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department said it had no role in planning the operation and was not authorized to assist with ICE administrative warrants. More than 56,000 students in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school district were reported absent over a two-day stretch during the operation.

When Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden announced on November 20 that Border Patrol agents had left, DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin publicly contradicted him, saying the operation was “not over” and was “not ending anytime soon.”¹⁵ The arrests documented in the lawsuit occurred against that backdrop, and the plaintiffs argue that unless a court intervenes, the same practices will continue against North Carolinians who happen to be nearby when agents show up.

1
Democracy Forward. Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Trump-Vance Administration Over Unlawful Warrantless Arrests in North Carolina
2
NC Newsline. Lawsuit Warrantless Immigration Arrests in North Carolina Targeted US Citizens
3
ACLU of North Carolina. Five Individuals Launch Class Action Lawsuit Over Warrantless Immigration Arrests in North Carolina
4
Democracy Forward. Challenging Unlawful Warrantless Immigration Arrests in North Carolina
5
New York Times. ICE Expands Power Agents Warrants
6
CBS News. ICE Memo Deportation Officers Warrantless Arrests
7
ACLU. Five Individuals Launch Class Action Lawsuit Over Warrantless Immigration Arrests in North Carolina
8
PACER Monitor. Aceituno et al v US Department of Homeland Security et al
9
WUNC. US Attorneys Seek Dismissal of Lawsuit Tied to NC Immigration Arrests
10
BPR. US Attorneys Seek Dismissal of Lawsuit Tied to NC Immigration Arrests
11
ACLU of DC. Cases
12
Oregon Capital Chronicle. Federal Judge Blocks Immigration Agents From Making Warrantless Arrests in Oregon
13
WUNC. ICE Arrests NC Criminal Record Triangle Customs Border Patrol
14
ABC News. Federal Agents Deployed Charlotte Immigration Enforcement Despite Rejections
15
WBTV. 425 Arrested Operation Charlottes Web Federal Officials Say