Abstract: On May 14, 2015, in De La Paz v. Coy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that immigrants cannot bring Bivens actions seeking damages against individual federal immigration officials for Fourth Amendment violations. The court reasoned that because the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (“INA”) already provides immigrants with an adequate remedy for Fourth Amendment violations, a Bivens remedy should not be extended to this immigration enforcement context. The court based its conclusion on its determination that the INA both offers immigrants sufficient remedial mechanisms for constitutional violations and effectively deters federal immigration officers from acting unconstitutionally. This Comment argues that the Fifth Circuit erred in holding that the INA provides an adequate remedial scheme for immigrants who fall victim to unconstitutional stops, arrests, and seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The INA provides no meaningful remedy to such immigrants and has no ability to deter federal immigration officers from engaging in unconstitutional conduct.