Idaho Families Sue Over Latino Horse-Racing Raid

Summary

Three families in Boise, Idaho, have filed a lawsuit alleging racial profiling and excessive force during an October 2025 raid at La Catedral horse-racing track. Around 400 people were detained; only five were arrested for gambling offences, while more than 100 were taken into custody on suspected immigration violations. The ACLU of Idaho says federal, state and local agencies used unconstitutional tactics—detaining people based on appearance, restraining adults and children with zip ties for hours, and denying food, water and bathroom access. Plaintiffs seek class-action status, damages and a federal ruling that their civil rights were violated under the Fourth and 14th Amendments and federal civil-rights statutes.

Key Points

Roughly 400 people were detained during the October 2025 operation at La Catedral; five arrests were tied to gambling offences.
Over 100 detainees were held on suspected immigration violations despite many not being questioned about gambling.
The ACLU alleges racial and ethnic targeting by ICE, the FBI, Idaho State Police and local authorities.
Claims include detentions based on appearance, prolonged zip‑tying of adults and children, and denial of basic needs such as food, water and bathroom access.
The lawsuit seeks class certification, damages and federal findings of violations of the Fourth and 14th Amendments and Sections 1983, 1985 and 1986.

Content Summary

The suit, brought by three Boise families with ACLU of Idaho representation, challenges a coordinated law‑enforcement operation at a rural horse‑racing venue. Attorneys say the raid prioritised immigration enforcement over the gambling probe, resulting in disparate treatment of Latine attendees. Officials have largely declined to comment publicly; ICE says the operation targeted illegal gambling and other criminal activity.

Context and Relevance

This case touches on civil‑liberties, immigration enforcement and multi‑agency policing. If certified as a class action and successful, it could influence how future raids are planned and reviewed, and shape accountability standards for federal and local collaborations. It’s relevant to anyone watching civil‑rights litigation, immigration policy or law‑enforcement oversight in the US.

Why should I read this?

Because this isn’t just another court filing — it’s about hundreds of people allegedly targeted en masse and potential changes to how raids are run. If you care about civil liberties, immigration enforcement or police accountability, you’ll want the short version: we read it, pulled out the essentials, and saved you the time.