Since Last May, ICE Officers Have Been Told They Don’t Need Warrants To Enter Homes
from the fuck-your-rights dept
The thing afforded the highest protections of the Fourth Amendment is a person’s home. This isn’t even a controversial statement. It has been that way ever since this amendment was ratified.
But, under Trump, we’re constantly seeing that the administration considers all rights to be privileges — something only granted to people this administration likes.
The Associated Press has obtained a blockbuster leak — one that shows ICE officers have been told that they’re free to enter homes without a judicial warrant. Instead, they can just write themselves an administrative warrant and then just go about their business of terrorizing a nation.
ICE carries around things they call warrants, but hardly resemble the real thing. An administrative warrant is self-issuing. The officer who wants to use it only needs to fill in a few blanks and sign it before heading out to try to arrest the person listed on the paperwork. There’s no signature line for supervisors, which means these aren’t reviewed by anyone else but the person writing them.
But since last May, ICE officers have been instructed they can treat these pieces of paper like actual warrants — you know, the ones that are subjected to at least a cursory review by a judge.
The whistleblower report [PDF] contains screenshots of the memo issued by ICE head Todd Lyons, last seen here complaining repeatedly about people who complain about ICE officers acting like paramilitary kidnapping squads.
What’s contained in that memo is batshit insane. First of all, it’s the DHS telling itself that it’s okay to ignore the Fourth Amendment.
Although the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not historically relied on administrative warrants alone to arrest aliens subject to final orders of removal in their place of residence, the DHS Office of the General Counsel has recently determined that the U.S. Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the immigration regulations do not prohibit relying on administrative warrants for this purpose.
There’s a very good reason the DHS has “not historically relied” on administrative warrants to enter people’s homes in search of arrestable migrants. That reason would be the US Constitution, which only “recently” fell out of favor with the GOP ruling class.
According to Lyons and the completely compromised DHS Office of the Legal Counsel, the only thing needed to engage in what is absolutely a warrantless entry is a final order of removal. A couple of paragraphs later, the memo states explicitly what ICE officers are authorized to do under the power of this memo (which definitely isn’t what they’re authorized to do under the Constitution):
Should the alien refuse admittance, ICE officers and agents should use only a necessary and reasonable amount of force to enter the alien’s residence…
You can write a memo and issue it and claim the in-house lawyers said it was all cool and legal, but that still doesn’t make it cool and legal. All it does is add another layer of “good faith” to ICE officers’ violations of the Fourth Amendment. After all, if they were told they could do this, how could they be expected to know it was actually illegal?
A footnote follows that, which makes it clear ICE officers will engage in warrantless entries even if they haven’t actually obtained a final order of removal.
This scoping is not intended to concede that an administrative warrant would be insufficient to arrest an alien in his or her place of residence prior to a final order of removal or where there is a final order of removal issued by an immigration officer.
In other words, ICE officers can enter any alleged migrant’s house without a warrant at pretty much any time, so long as they’re carrying their self-issued non-warrants (the Form I-205 referenced throughout the memo).
This directly contradicts ERO (Enforcement and Removal Operations) training for ICE officers, which is included in the leaked documents the AP obtained. That training spells it out succinctly and explicitly (caps in the original):
An administrative arrest warrant does NOT alone authorize a 4th Amendment search of any kind.
That’s no longer the case, apparently. It’s not like this training has been rescinded. It seemingly remains on the books because it creates even more plausible deniability for officers being sued.
And ICE director Todd Lyons (along with his OLC enablers) know the contents of this memo can’t possibly be legal. That’s why this memo has never been officially added to ERO training or otherwise officially made part of the ICE operations manual. If Lyons and other top immigration enforcement officials actually thought this shit would hold in court, they wouldn’t have done this:
While addressed to “All ICE Personnel,” in practice the May 12 Memo has not been formally distributed to all personnel. Instead, the May 12 Memo has been provided to select DHS officials who are then directed to verbally brief the new policy for action. Those supervisors then show the Memo to some employees, like our clients, and direct them to read the Memo and return it to the supervisor.
In the case of the whistleblower who gave this to the Associated Press, they were instructed to read it and return it. They were not allowed to take notes. They were also informed that another employee had been reassigned for questioning ICE policies, which was taken by the whistleblower as the overt threat it is.
This is fucking insane. A federal government agency has decided the Fourth Amendment no longer exists and has done everything it can from keeping this clearly unconstitutional policy change from spreading beyond those who’ve already bought into the DHS’s new direction as the expression of the GOP’s white nationalist goals.
And it’s a problem that’s only going to get exponentially worse as ICE frantically on-boards new hires, who are given plenty of cash, but nearly nonexistent training before being sent out to fulfill the racist desires of people like White House advisor Stephen Miller. What little they may know (or care) about constitutional rights is being eroded even further by official memos that claim it’s perfectly legal to do something that clearly — under the DHS’s own published training — violates the Fourth Amendment.
Without a doubt, the administration will shrug this off and/or tell people they shouldn’t believe things they’ve seen with their own eyes. For now, we can only hope this might knock a few Republicans out of the MAGA loop, even if it’s only the ones who realize they definitely wouldn’t want to turn this unearned expansion of power over to an administration not run by one of their own.
Filed Under: 4th amendment, administrative warrants, all bets are off, bia, dhs, ice, mass deportation, olc, todd lyons, trump administration


Comments on “Since Last May, ICE Officers Have Been Told They Don’t Need Warrants To Enter Homes”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
They all gotta go home. Sorry dude.
Re:
You come off as the kind of person who sees a five-year-old child being kidnapped by federal agents and thinks “they’re being far too lenient on that little shit”. Seriously, just say you want a violent genocide of Black and brown people and be done with it already. It would at least be far more intellectually honest than this tapdance around the truth that you want mass deportations because of “crime”.
Re: Re:
Do you want ICE to keep families together or to separate them?
Do you think having a child keeps a natural citizen from being arrested and going to jail?
Re: Re: Re:
Tell me, do you think it’s okay or not to deport children that are citizens?
Do you also think it’s okay for ICE to deny the parent to leave the child to a caregiver or other parent? If you didn’t know, ICE regularly deny this course of action.
It speaks volumes of a person how they see and treat children. What kind of person are you?
Re:
This is such a troll reply. The discussion isn’t even about whether or not they should be deported or not. It’s about the 4th Amendment and the standard rights EVERYONE in the US has.
But you have made it quite clear you don’t give a shit about rights, other than for yourself and your crew of cultists.
Re: Re:
Which also means he hasn’t thought about how easily the regime could ignore his rights when they find it convenient.
Re: Re:
I guess that when DHS says “final order of removal”, it means that theses people are no longer in US, like in an airplane to another part of the world, where the Constitution exists.
Now, if you really want to play dumb with them, go ahead, but you’re gonna loose.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s not at all how the law works, you fucking idiot.
Re:
Nice straw man, dipshit.
Re:
Nothing stops an ICE goon from writing his own warrant to bust your door down.
If the rule that says you can bust down someone’s door and bag them based is a big secret that you don’t want to share with the class, what exactly is ICE’s genius plan when they get sued? You, the officer, get put there on the stand and the judge asks you to point to the part of your training that says you were allowed to do what you did and you cannot. Your lawyer cannot. No one can, because it’s secret (and also non-legally binding nonsense).
Maybe I’m smarter than the average ICE recruit but that seems like a giant liability and a guaranteed promise to throw individual officers under the bus when the whole thing is challenged in court.
Re:
That might have been the plan. But part of throwing them under the bus would be taking swift action to punish the agents involved. To give the appearance of punishing those agents.
Now look at Good’s murder. How quickly the Trump administration moved to protect the murderer and prevent any local authorities from investigating.
Do you really think the Trump administration would be capable of throwing the agents under the bus ?
Because it seems more likely that they would say and do a lot of things that would be used as evidence that the policy of breaking in without a judicial warrant exists.
Re: Re:
Sure, if they thought they could save their own skins by doing it.
Re: Re: Re:
Just wait until January 2029. I guarantee that regardless of who wins the election, you’re going to see a shitload of pardons for Trump cronies (including ICE agents) to make sure all their asses are covered…in exchange for loyalty to the man who gave them those pardons, of course.
Re: Re: Re:2
Bold of you to assume Trump would give out amnesty to all those who served him blindly but have nothing left to offer.
Re: Re: Re:3
Loyalty to his hand-picked successor would be the one thing they could offer.
Of course, that offer would expire when It Happens™, but still.
Re: Re: Re:3
Bold of you to assume Trump’s going to make it three more years, the way he’s looking. And sounding. And moving.
Re: Re: Re:4
Every time something slightly odd happens with Trump—be it a days-long disappearance from the public or Air Force One turning back around soon after takeoff—everyone is holding their breath in anticipation of whether It finally Happened.
That’s both incredibly fucked up and a sign of the times that we’d rather have JD “the economy is the Titanic” Vance as president.
Re: Re: Re:4
I’m pretty sure I already saw a Techdirt comment hypothesizing a “Weekend at Bernie’s” situation… and Bernie somehow “made it” long enough to get a sequel.
Re: Re: Re:3
Let’s be honest. It will be the auto-pen signing those after trump is dead.
Re: Re: Re:2
Trump is a sore loser. He already proved it last time by not pardoning his insurrectionists when he had time to do so. It was only after he won again that he did so.
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, they might want to. But they can still fail at it.
Take too long to realize that they should throw the agents under the bus and there will be too many statements of support from the Trump administration to deny that it’s policy.
Get a few other agents smart enough to realize that they might get the next bus, and they can turn whistleblower. Either from enough of them saying that they were told the same things or from something like this memo coming out.
When we learned about the government’s rationale for why 702 was constitutional, one of the (incorrect) foundations of its arguments was that Americans had no 4th Amendment rights in their conversations with non-Americans. I wonder if DHS/ICE—in its fascism speedrunning—is relying on internal guidance that “the 4th Amendment doesn’t apply to those without legal status.”
Reminder
People have rights. Governments have privileges. And the U.S. Constitution is absolutely clear that governments have only those privileges granted to it by the people (by the ratification of the Constitution and other laws).
Given the history of this administration, we should probably check that there’s a real lawyer in this role.
“Should the alien refuse admittance”
Just going to point out that we know for certain that US citizens have refused admittance to their homes and had their doors busted down.
The wanton, malicious property damage that ICE has committed is absolutely jaw dropping.
policy is NOT law!
where in the constitution does it say you are protected by the constitution unless your a non-citizen?
because what we are seeing here is that the alphabet mafia is writing policy thinking it’s the law and misusing there authority! ATF already got spanked for that! what we are seeing here is nothing more then TREASON!
TOO MUCH FEDERAL POWER = ABUSE OF POWER! time to put these clowns back in there place!
Re:
It’s not treason. Yet. Treason has a very specific definition and very specific requirements that are almost impossible to meet. But notice I said “yet”? How much you wanna bet they’ll cross that line eventually? Or they already have and we just don’t know about it?
Re: Re:
Right, but let’s remember why the Constitution is so strict about that: the American Colonies had just booted out a king who liked to use the legal system as a club, claiming “Treason!” for anything he didn’t like. Sound familiar?
Let’s look at that definition, too:
Now, Trump’s probably not gonna confess—except frequently on X and television, which are not “open Court”—but has mobilized troops to work against the States. Is that “War” per se, and are Trump’s people “Enemies”? It’s a bit of a stretch, but there’s no shortage of witnesses. Then again, there’s also no shortage of other crimes that these people have committed, which are easier to convict on.
Let’s just focus on giving our king the boot. Who gets charged with what, and what the punishments should be, can all be figured out later.
Warrant?
NOW you tell them?
All they need do, is add another Blank Line and a 2nd persons signature..
WHO has time to LEARN all the Judges names..
2a say bang!
Yup
Re: Case vs Montana
Case vs Montana says cops go bang bang back as soon as your hand goes near that weapon
Blivens being just Blevins forever means you don’t have any way forward against federal law enforcement.
Yes its against the 4th amendment but you don’t have a realistic chance of suing them even as a citizen at least under this administration.
Re: Re:
Really ICE are just asking people to shoot them first in fear for the lives, and keep on firing until all of them are dead. If putting the gun down gets you executed by a death-squad, then it is pointless to drop the gun. Instead the actions which leave them most likely to survive? Shoot the ICE agents fatally. Surrender and mercy are both traps.
The conclusions should be horrific but they are all predictable consequences that anyone with either a shred of empathy or knowledge of game theory could predict.
Re: Re: Re:
The only problem there is that I think Trump wants dead ICE agents. Because that will help him invoke the insurrection act and send in the military.
Every time I see something like this about the Trump administration enabling constitutional violations, I ask myself the same question:
If the position of president and its powers is granted by the constitution, but Trump has thrown the constitution away…what, exactly, makes him a legitimate ruler?
The combination of presidential pardons and the supreme court granting immunity for all acts in office has created and uncontrollable regime.
Re:
Not all acts in office. Some hazily-defined set of “official acts”, based on a test the Supreme Court has not yet specified, so that they can later invent justifications for why it only applies to Republican presidents.
So at this point, even if they are screaming “Police, warrant!” you might as well start shooting because they probably wrote it themselves in crayon.
This isn’t going to stop by just getting lawyers after the fact. The Gestapo have to start losing people.
Re:
These invasions are clearly intended to provoke protesters into retaliating against ICE so that ICE and the military can escalate.
I’m real, real wary when I see some rando in the comments show up out of nowhere to encourage us to do the exact thing ICE is encouraging us to.
Re: Re:
Yes. That’s my worry as well. Trump wants to invoke the insurrection act.
Someone who uses lethal force in self-defense that he can spin as something else might be enough justification for him to give the order.
Re: Re:
Someone who is in their home minding their own business is not a ‘protester.’
I am well-aware of what Trump wants, and how he (more likely, Stephen Miller) is trying to provoke it.
I’ve been here since 2018. You do things your way – I’ll defend my home and my rights my way.
Re: Re: Re:
cool
Re: Re: Re:
Do you really think ICE, DHS, and the Trump regime will make that distinction?
Re: Re:
Just in case my other response is not clear enough: I am specifically talking about ICE breaking into someone’s home on an administrative warrant. I am not advocating for violence in the streets.
One’s home is the ultimate sanctuary of Constitutional rights, and courts have never ruled otherwise. It is inevitable that this tactic will result in gunfire. These ‘agents’ are poorly trained and believe they have no limits to their authority. Overzealous law enforcement is precisely why the judicial branch issues warrants. The judge is an objective evaluator of the evidence before violating someone’s rights.
ICE is going to eventually use a lazy administrative warrant to break into someone’s home who responds with trained violence. We already know they will violate court orders on film and then claim otherwise, so I don’t think ICE is going to stop doing this until that happens.
Maybe not even then.
Re: Re: Re:
Unfortunately legality only matters after the fact with this president.
In the heat of the moment mid break-in with bullets flying, ice will probably end up murdering you and everyone in your house because laws dont actually stop someone from breaking the law.
Punishments and laws only creates an incentive to not break the law.
Aftermath for Trump Sycophants
What to Noem, and the other Trumpy sycophants think their life is going to be like when they leave office?? Do they think people are going to forget the atrocities, lies an immoral actions they’ve taken at his behest??
Re:
“I’m going to get the fuck out of this country with all the money I made through insider trading and go live in a place that has no extradition treaty with the US.”
Re:
Im sure there will still be racists and racist organizations out there that will give them refuge.