Mojado und tonks: Was bedeuten die Begriffe, die ICE-Agenten benutzen, um Migranten in Los Angeles zu fangen?

In late 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents conducting raids in Los Angeles used derogatory terms such as “mojado” and “tonks” to identify undocumented migrants, according to court filings. Civil rights organizations argue that these records demonstrate racially motivated arrests and have requested a judge to prohibit such practices. The evidence includes body camera footage and text messages from border patrol agents, which show them using slurs to describe individuals they targeted during operations. The term “mojado,” meaning “wet” in Spanish, is a derogatory label often applied to undocumented immigrants. “Tonks,” meanwhile, refers to the sound made when a heavy object, such as a flashlight, strikes someone’s head, a term associated with the Border Patrol. Despite a 2019 guidance from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) prohibiting its use due to its offensive nature, some agents continued to employ the term. One example comes from a video recorded at a Home Depot in Hollywood, where an agent reportedly identified a man as “mojado” while seated in a van. Text messages further reveal that officers were instructed to locate individuals described as “tonks” and pursue them immediately. These communications suggest a pattern of behavior that goes beyond standard operational procedures. Legal documents filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and private attorneys allege that ICE agents relied on racial profiling to determine whom to detain during the raids. The filings claim that the government's assertion, that agents acted solely based on intelligence, has been undermined by the evidence. According to the documents, one officer was observed targeting a man based on his appearance, rather than any specific criminal activity. The ACLU has argued that ICE violated procedural norms by failing to conduct individualized assessments before making arrests. Instead, agents appear to have targeted individuals perceived as low-income and Latino. This approach has led to allegations of systemic discrimination. In May 2025, internal ICE directives encouraged agents to expand their operations to include more “collateral” arrests, individuals who were not the primary targets but were encountered during the operation. Mayra Joachín, an attorney with the ACLU, stated that there is sufficient evidence to indicate that racial slurs are commonly used by immigration enforcement personnel to identify potential detainees. She emphasized that this practice constitutes a broader issue within the agency. The ACLU has sought a temporary restraining order to prevent ICE from using racial profiling in its operations. This request is supported by recovered communications from agents involved in the Los Angeles raids. However, CalMatters reports that only 88 out of 1400 participating agents voluntarily handed over their devices for investigation. This lack of cooperation raises concerns about transparency and accountability within the agency. As the legal battle continues, the focus remains on whether the use of racial slurs by law enforcement can be considered a violation of constitutional protections. With ongoing investigations into the incidents, the outcome could set a precedent for how immigration enforcement is regulated in future operations.