At the June 6, 2025 Los Angeles City Council meeting, public commenters urged the council to halt the expansion of real‑time crime centers (RTCCs) and related surveillance systems, saying those systems risk feeding information to federal immigration enforcement and creating a citywide biometric dragnet.

A participant who identified themselves as part of a community self‑defense coalition described multiple ICE enforcement actions they said were under way in Los Angeles and linked those operations to what they called an expanding surveillance infrastructure. “You have automatic license plate readers. You have CCTV cameras. You have record management systems, which is a constant feeder to the federal government,” the commenter said during public comment. “We sent a letter. You gotta stop this thing and this is gonna expand.” The speaker was not identified by name on the public record.

Other public speakers expanded on the same theme, urging the council to reconsider purchases and expansions tied to RTCC technology and automatic license plate readers (LAPRs). Speakers said that data integration and information sharing between local systems and federal databases enables Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in neighborhoods.

Councilmembers publicly acknowledged reports of immigration enforcement activity during announcements following public comment. Councilmember Hernandez said her office and community organizers were responding to “swift and aggressive” immigration enforcement in her district, urging residents to attend know‑your‑rights trainings and prepare emergency plans. “LA is a sanctuary city and we've made it clear that we will not cooperate and use our resources for ICE and federal immigration enforcement,” Hernandez said, while also warning that federal officers continue to operate in Los Angeles.

Speakers representing civil‑rights and surveillance‑watchdog organizations asked the council to halt further deployment of technologies that would aggregate video, plate reads and other data into searchable, citywide systems. They argued that such systems disproportionately affect Black, Brown and immigrant communities and urged the council to instead invest in community services they said would improve public safety without increasing surveillance.

The council did not take new action on RTCC procurement during the meeting; the remarks were delivered during the public‑comment period. Several commenters also linked RTCC expansion to broader public‑safety budget discussions and to recent high‑profile enforcement operations in parts of the city.

The public‑comment period closed before the council resumed its agenda votes. Council staff and department representatives did not present a new RTCC procurement motion on June 6; councilmembers or staff who requested follow‑up were not recorded as taking formal direction on RTCCs during this meeting.