LOS ANGELES — An appeals court on Friday kept in place a Los Angeles federal judge’s ruling that bars immigration agents from using a person’s spoken language or job, like day laborer, as the sole pretext to detain people.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in its ruling said that there seemed to be one issue with U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong’s temporary restraining order, but it did not put it on hold as the government sought.

The appeals court said that a part of the July 11 temporary restraining order referring to “except as permitted by law” was too vague.

“Defendants, however, are not likely to succeed on their remaining arguments,” the court ruled, referring to the U.S. government.

Frimpong, a judge at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles, issued the temporary restraining order after a lawsuit was filed by people who claimed they were detained by immigration officers without good reason.

Three people were waiting at a bus stop for jobs when they were detained by immigration officials, and two others are U.S. citizens who claim they were stopped and aggressively questioned despite telling agents they were citizens. Other organizations, including the United Farm Workers, also sued.

Frimpong wrote in the temporary restraining order ruling that the people suing were “likely to succeed in proving that the federal government is indeed conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers.”

The July 11 restraining order bars the detention of people unless the officer or agent “has reasonable suspicion that the person to be stopped is within the United States in violation of U.S. immigration law.”

It says they may not base that suspicion solely on a person’s apparent race or ethnicity; the fact that they’re speaking Spanish or English with an accent; their presence at a particular location like a bus stop or a day laborer pickup site; or the type of work one does.

Los Angeles has been targeted by the Trump administration for immigration raids that the city’s mayor has decried as a campaign to terrorize residents.

The lawsuit that led to the temporary restraining order was filed against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others.

Kyle Harvick, the deputy incident commander for the government’s immigration action in Los Angeles, said that “certain types of businesses, including carwashes” were chosen by immigration agents “because past experiences have demonstrated that illegal aliens utilize and seek work at these locations,” according to the appeals court ruling.

The appeals court found that “the four enumerated factors at issue — apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, particular location, and type of work, even when considered together — describe only a broad profile and ‘do not demonstrate reasonable suspicion for any particular stop.'”

The appeals court panel said that the government did not dispute constitutional issues when trying to get the temporary restraining order stayed.

“They did not meaningfully dispute the district court’s conclusion that sole reliance on the four enumerated factors, alone or in combination, does not satisfy the constitutional requirement of reasonable suspicion,” the appeals court panel wrote.

Mark Rosenbaum, senior special counsel for strategic litigation at Public Counsel, which is among the groups representing the people who sued, said Friday that the actions by immigration agents in the Los Angeles operation were unconstitutional.

“Today’s ruling sends a powerful message: the government cannot excuse illegal conduct by relying on racial profiling as a tool of immigration enforcement,” Rosenbaum said. “These raids were unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety.”

The appeals court did find that part of Frimpong’s temporary order was vague, relating to “except as permitted by law” in the clause about detaining people based on the four factors of race, speaking Spanish, a location or type of work. But it otherwise denied the government’s motion for a stay.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, called the appeals court ruling a victory.

“Today is a victory for the rule of law and for the City of Los Angeles,” she said in a statement. “The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now.”

The immigration raids launched in Los Angeles in June resulted in large protests in the city, some of which turned violent. The Trump administration sent National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles in a move that was condemned by Bass, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and others.

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Friday about the appeals court ruling.