As federal immigration raids return to Los Angeles, City Council is considering an expansion of surveillance infrastructure that civil liberties experts warn could deepen local entanglement with federal enforcement operations. Councilmember Traci Park is leading a proposal to expand centralized hubs called Real Time Crime Centers and prioritize their deployment on the Westside.
These hubs bring mass surveillance straight to our doorstep by allowing LAPD to monitor and analyze live surveillance feeds from across the city. The proposed RTCC is part of a broader effort by LAPD to integrate body camera footage, automated license plate readers, gunshot detection systems, private camera networks, and predictive analytics into a single real-time system. Officials argue that this will improve emergency response and support crime prevention. The LAPD has already secured $15 million in funding for surveillance expansion, with Park’s motion aiming to establish the next phase in her district.
However, the timing and context of the proposal have raised serious concerns among community groups and policy researchers. Recent reporting from LA Public Press and local organizers confirmed that federal immigration agents are conducting coordinated enforcement operations in Los Angeles, with some agents reportedly staying in local hotels to carry out extended raids. In several recent incidents, LAPD officers were observed providing logistical support to these efforts, including traffic control and location assistance during arrests.
Although Los Angeles has declared itself a sanctuary city, LAPD policy allows certain forms of information sharing with federal agencies. According to the department’s 2025 Federal Immigration FAQ, officers may notify ICE of an individual’s status based on “reasonable suspicion,” and biometric data collected during bookings is automatically shared with federal databases. Critics warn that expanding LAPD’s surveillance capabilities could amplify the scope of this data-sharing infrastructure and provide additional tools for immigration enforcement.
Researchers who study surveillance in the context of authoritarianism and racialized policing note that systems like RTCCs have historically served dual purposes: enforcing criminal law and enabling social control. Surveillance infrastructure has long been used in the United States not only to address crime, but also to monitor and contain communities of color, particularly immigrants, protesters, and those viewed as politically subversive. It comes as no surprise that under a federal administration openly hostile to immigrants and civil rights, expanding surveillance infrastructure at the local level actively enables and accelerates a federal agenda rooted in fear, disappearance, and authoritarian control—an agenda that operates far outside the bounds of democratic accountability.
LAPD’s participation in the Joint Regional Intelligence Center, a multi-agency fusion center, further complicates oversight. Once local surveillance data enters this system, it can be accessed by a range of federal entities, including Homeland Security Investigations and ICE. Civil rights advocates argue that this undermines the city’s sanctuary policies and limits the public’s ability to hold either local or federal agencies accountable for how data is used. Venice-based organizer Laura Ceballos voiced opposition to the RTCC proposal in public comment. She pointed out that the integration of existing camera networks into LAPD systems “poses serious threats of data breaches with unauthorized agencies including ICE,” and noted that surveillance tools “lead to a false sense of security, undermine public trust, and increase racial profiling on people of color that have been marginalized.”
Outside of immigration enforcement, opponents of the RTCC also raise concerns about cost, accuracy, and long-term effectiveness. Predictive policing software and mass surveillance tools have repeatedly been shown to replicate historical patterns of racial bias. In some cities, similar systems have led to costly lawsuits related to misidentification, false arrests, and First Amendment violations. Los Angeles itself has paid out millions of dollars in recent years to settle claims tied to protest-related police violence, some of which was informed by surveillance footage.
Supporters of the RTCC maintain that it will allow for faster, more coordinated responses to violent crime and improve public safety outcomes. But critics argue that these benefits are often overstated, and that the risks—particularly to civil liberties and vulnerable communities—are rarely fully considered in policymaking. Councilmember Park, who has received substantial campaign contributions from police unions and Trump-aligned donors, has shown little indication that she intends to engage with these concerns. Her ongoing support for surveillance-heavy policing mirrors the broader national shift toward Trump-era strategies of expanded law enforcement power, often at the expense of transparency, accountability, and public trust.