LA Businesses Suffered $3 Million Loss During June 2025 ICE Enforcement Operations

A UCLA study released Wednesday estimated that businesses near nine Los Angeles enforcement sites lost $3.16 million in revenue during the first two weeks of immigration operations in June 2025. Customer visits fell by 46,000 during the same period.

The report, titled The Cost of Fear: The Impacts of Immigration Enforcement on Small Businesses and Latino Entrepreneurs in LA County, examined what researchers called the “chilling effect” of the operations. The sites included major commercial hubs such as Ambiance Apparel and Westlake Home Depot.

The study found that 68% of surveyed Latino entrepreneurs temporarily closed or cut business hours. More than half of business owners, 59%, said they lost more than half their revenue.

Employees missed work, too. Half of the owners reported absences linked to fear of enforcement.

The study measured effects from operations that began in June 2025, not a new enforcement campaign. Its findings place the business losses alongside a broader economic and social disruption across the region.

One year later, 95% of surveyed owners still faced financial challenges. Another 52% could not consistently cover operating costs.

The losses continued after the agents left

The businesses surveyed absorbed the immediate drop in customers, but the report also recorded longer-running effects. Many Latino owners took on debt or laid off staff to keep operating.

Latino business owners account for roughly 28% of all firms in the county. The report found that 76% of entrepreneurs said the operations and the continuing presence of agents directly harmed their health and mental well-being.

The decline reached public transportation. Bus ridership on high-vulnerability lines dropped by 17,000 people per month, reflecting how residents avoided public spaces during and after the enforcement activity.

The figures cover the two-week period after enforcement began in June 2025. The longer-term results come from the same study’s follow-up assessment one year later.

The campaign brought troops, protests and a federal response

The June operations formed part of a wider enforcement campaign involving approximately 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines supporting ICE and CBP operations.

Federal officials presented the campaign as a public-safety and border-security effort. In a June 9, 2025, statement, Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said:

“These heinous criminals, including child abusers and pedophiles, are some of the illegal aliens arrested yesterday in Los Angeles. Why do Governor Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass care more about violent criminal illegal aliens than they do about protecting their own citizens? These rioters in Los Angeles are fighting to keep rapists, murderers, and other violent criminals loose on Los Angeles streets.”

The Department of Homeland Security said June 24, 2025, that apprehensions and gotaways at the U.S. Southern border had fallen nearly 50% from May to June after the department began removing what it called the “worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens” from Los Angeles.

“Sanctuary cities are no longer a safe haven, and we have made the message clear: We will hunt down criminal illegal aliens and remove them from our communities.”

DHS described the operations as a direct response to sanctuary policies in Los Angeles and California. Researchers said agents targeted highly visible commercial corridors to maximize the “volume, fear, and spectacle” of enforcement.

The campaign also generated public costs. A June 16, 2025, report from the LA City Clerk estimated that the city spent $19.7 million on protests and response activities during that month.

Businesses near the sites carried the public impact

The report’s nine locations included commercial corridors where small businesses depended on regular foot traffic. A reduction of 46,000 customer visits over two weeks translated into lost sales for shops operating close to the enforcement sites.

The findings also connect business interruptions with labor disruptions. Owners reported shortened schedules and temporary closures, while employees missed shifts because of fear. Some businesses then borrowed money or reduced their workforce.

The study did not limit its measurement to arrests or direct enforcement encounters. It tracked behavior among people who avoided commercial areas, workers who stayed home and owners who struggled to meet basic operating costs.

That pattern helps explain why the report recorded continuing financial pressure a year later. A business could reopen after a temporary closure while still losing customers, accumulating debt or cutting staff.

Officials continued defending the enforcement network

The federal government continued defending the operational infrastructure after the June campaign. On July 22, 2026, ICE spokesman Jason Sweeney said California detention centers remained central to the agency’s West Coast system.

“Unlike in states like Florida and Oklahoma, ICE cannot rely on local state and county partners for detention space in California. [California] detention centers are crucial to ICE’s detention network on the West Coast.”

Sweeney’s statement addressed detention capacity rather than the UCLA estimate. The report, meanwhile, focused on the commercial and social consequences around the nine enforcement sites.

The two accounts describe different parts of the same period: federal agencies defended enforcement and detention operations, while the study quantified the costs reported by nearby entrepreneurs and residents.

The report’s follow-up figures extend through June 2026. At that point, 95% of surveyed owners still reported financial challenges, and 52% remained unable to consistently cover operating costs.