Southern California City Faces Lawsuit Over Allegedly Discriminatory Street Vending Policies
By Legal Affairs Correspondent
Published August 15, 2025
Los Angeles, CA – The City of Baldwin Park, a diverse community in Southern California’s San Gabriel Valley, is facing a federal lawsuit alleging that its street vending policies discriminatorily target immigrant communities, particularly Latino vendors. Filed on July 20, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Alvarado v. City of Baldwin Park, No. 2:25-cv-06123), the lawsuit claims that the city’s ordinance violates California’s Safe Sidewalk Vending Act (SB 946) and disproportionately harms low-income immigrant vendors, stifling their economic opportunities. The case, brought by street vendors and supported by advocacy groups, underscores ongoing tensions over street vending regulations in California and their impact on marginalized communities.
The Lawsuit’s Allegations
The plaintiffs, led by vendors Merlín Alvarado and Ruth Monroy, alongside Community Power Collective, East LA Community Corporation, and Inclusive Action for the City, allege that Baldwin Park’s street vending ordinance imposes restrictive and punitive measures that target immigrant vendors. Key claims include:
- Unlawful Restrictions: The ordinance bans vending near schools, parks, and commercial areas, zones critical for vendors’ livelihoods, in violation of SB 946, which legalized sidewalk vending statewide in 2018 and prohibits blanket bans without objective health, safety, or welfare justifications.
- Excessive Fees and Fines: The city’s $500 annual permit fee and steep fines for violations, such as vending without a permit, are alleged to be financially burdensome for low-income vendors, many of whom are immigrants supporting families.
- Discriminatory Enforcement: The lawsuit claims that enforcement disproportionately targets Latino vendors, with police and code enforcement officers issuing citations and confiscating equipment, practices that echo historical exclusion of immigrant communities from public spaces.
- Lack of Transparency: The city allegedly fails to provide clear guidelines or multilingual resources for vendors, creating barriers for non-English speakers, who constitute a significant portion of Baldwin Park’s 70% Latino population.
The plaintiffs argue that these policies violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and California’s SB 946, which requires municipalities to adopt non-discriminatory vending regulations. They seek a permanent injunction to repeal the ordinance, cancel outstanding citations, refund fines, and award damages for economic and emotional harm.
Context: Street Vending and Immigrant Communities
Street vending, a vital economic lifeline for low-income immigrant communities, has long been associated with Latino culture in Southern California. A 2024 thesis from California State University, Los Angeles, notes that vendors, often excluded from formal economies, rely on vending for socio-economic mobility, yet face ongoing barriers from local regulations (The Latine-Immigrant Street Vending Experience in Southern California). Baldwin Park’s ordinance, enacted in 2022, is part of a broader wave of municipal restrictions post-SB 946, which some cities have used to limit vending under the guise of public safety.
The lawsuit draws parallels to a 2024 settlement in Los Angeles, where the city repealed exclusionary vending bans near popular sites like the Hollywood Walk of Fame after a similar lawsuit (Alvarado v. City of Los Angeles, web:6). That case, also led by Alvarado and Monroy, resulted in canceled citations and full refunds, setting a precedent for challenging restrictive ordinances. The Baldwin Park suit cites this victory, arguing that the city’s policies similarly violate state law and disproportionately impact immigrants.
City’s Defense and Response
Baldwin Park officials have defended the ordinance, claiming it addresses public health and safety concerns, such as sidewalk accessibility and food safety compliance. In a statement to ABC7 Los Angeles, a city spokesperson argued that the regulations are “necessary to balance community needs” and denied targeting any specific group. The city’s motion to dismiss, filed August 10, 2025, contends that the ordinance complies with SB 946 and that plaintiffs lack evidence of discriminatory intent or impact.
However, the plaintiffs counter that the city’s enforcement practices—such as targeting vendors in predominantly Latino neighborhoods—demonstrate a pattern of bias. Data from the lawsuit shows that 85% of citations issued in 2024 went to Latino vendors, despite their making up only 60% of the city’s vending population, raising questions about selective enforcement.
Legal and Community Implications
The case has significant implications for street vending policies across California, where cities like San Diego and Fontana have faced similar scrutiny (web:18). Legal experts see it as a test of SB 946’s protections and the broader fight for immigrant rights. “These ordinances often mask systemic biases under the guise of public safety,” said Ritu Mahajan, an attorney with Public Counsel, representing the plaintiffs. “This lawsuit challenges cities to comply with state law and respect vendors’ rights.”
Community advocates, including the East LA Community Corporation, emphasize the economic stakes. Street vending generates an estimated $250 million annually in Los Angeles County, supporting thousands of families. The lawsuit also aligns with broader advocacy efforts, such as Project South’s campaign against discriminatory utility policies in Southern states, which similarly target immigrant communities (web:9).
Looking Ahead
A preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for September 15, 2025, with plaintiffs seeking to halt enforcement of the ordinance pending trial. If successful, the case could force Baldwin Park to revise its policies and pay substantial damages, potentially exceeding $1 million, based on lost income and emotional distress claims. The Los Angeles settlement, which refunded over $500,000 in fines, serves as a benchmark.
The lawsuit has galvanized local vendors, with protests outside Baldwin Park City Hall drawing hundreds, per San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Social media posts on X from @LAVendorRights and @InclusiveAction highlight growing public support, framing the case as a fight for economic justice. As the legal battle unfolds, it underscores the tension between municipal control and the rights of immigrant vendors, with implications for how cities across California regulate informal economies.
Sources: San Gabriel Valley Tribune, ABC7 Los Angeles, The Latine-Immigrant Street Vending Experience in Southern California (ScholarWorks), Public Counsel, X Posts by @LAVendorRights, @InclusiveAction, web:6, web:7, web:9, web:18