Opinion ID: 475326
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Restrictions on Consensual Questioning

Text: 22 Paragraph two also requires that every INS warrant contain a specific description of each suspect to be questioned and be based on probable cause to believe each such person is an [illegal alien]. An arrest requires probable cause to believe that the worker is an illegal alien, see Tejeda-Mata v. INS, 626 F.2d 721, 724-25 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 994, 102 S.Ct. 2280, 73 L.Ed.2d 1291 (1982), and a worker may not be detained absent reasonable suspicion of illegal alienage, Benitez-Mendez v. INS, 760 F.2d 907, 909 (9th Cir.1983). But, non-detentive questioning is permitted based solely on a reasonable suspicion that the person is an alien. See LaDuke, 762 F.2d at 1327. Such consensual encounters do not implicate the employee's Fourth Amendment rights. Delgado, 466 U.S. at 221, 104 S.Ct. at 1765. 23 The Court in Delgado stated that no detention occurs in a factory survey as long as INS agents' conduct has given [workers] no reason to believe that they would be detained if they gave truthful answers to the questions put to them or if they simply refused to answer. 466 U.S. at 218, 104 S.Ct. at 1764. Where a worker merely refuses to answer, id. at 216, 104 S.Ct. at 1763, but does not attempt to flee or evade the agents, id. at 220, 104 S.Ct. at 1765, any additional steps taken by the agents must be supported by some minimal level of objective justification to validate the detention or seizure. Id. at 216-17, 104 S.Ct. at 1763. 24 We find paragraphs two and three of the injunction order to have been improvidently entered. We strike these paragraphs from the injunction order because they exceed the particularity requirements of the Fourth Amendment and unduly restrict INS's ability to engage in consensual questioning. 25 Because of our conclusions as to paragraphs two and three of the injunction order, it is necessary also to strike paragraph five. 7 The procedures specified in paragraph five make no sense in the absence of a warrant specifically identifying the targeted workers. Moreover, the restriction on generalized questioning is inconsistent with the holding of Delgado, at least where the INS agents have a reasonable suspicion that those questioned are aliens. See LaDuke, 762 F.2d at 1327.