- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Can You Prevent ICE from Entering Your Home with no Warrant?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:37 pm to Camp Randall
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:37 pm to Camp Randall
quote:
We only support the 2nd and 4th amendment when it suits our politics. You must be new here.
I’d say some have left themselves open to that. But that’s not the point here.
I don’t want ideology. I’m looking for what the line is.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:39 pm to paulb52
quote:terrible advice.
Sure, if you have nothing to hide, why would you deny entry? If you do have something to hide, then tell them they need a warrant.
See above poster. Make them get a warrant and don't give them a reason to think a felony is in progress behind that door (won't need a warrant)
Don't talk to them either. Ask Gen. Flynn and thousands of others
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:42 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
LINK
"Administrative Warrants
An ICE administrative warrant is a document, issued by a federal agency such as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), purporting to document their authority to arrest a person suspected of violating immigration laws. These administrative documents are not signed by a neutral magistrate or judge but rather an immigration officer like an ICE agent or immigration judge.
An ICE administrative warrant is NOT a judicial warrant. ICE administrative warrants do not give ICE officials authority to enter a place where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, without consent.
If this happens—state clearly that you do not consent to them entering but do not physically resist. If ICE officials have already entered, then ask them to leave and state that you do not consent to a search."
"Administrative Warrants
An ICE administrative warrant is a document, issued by a federal agency such as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), purporting to document their authority to arrest a person suspected of violating immigration laws. These administrative documents are not signed by a neutral magistrate or judge but rather an immigration officer like an ICE agent or immigration judge.
An ICE administrative warrant is NOT a judicial warrant. ICE administrative warrants do not give ICE officials authority to enter a place where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, without consent.
If this happens—state clearly that you do not consent to them entering but do not physically resist. If ICE officials have already entered, then ask them to leave and state that you do not consent to a search."
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:43 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
I get where you’re going with this. I don’t see it happening but if they have information about a house harboring illegals then they have orders to enter. The slippery slope here is if there ever comes a time democrats get their way and pass a sweeping gun ban then they will use this same excuse to enter homes.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:51 pm to stout
quote:
A January 2026 internal ICE memo indicates that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents may now assert authority to forcibly enter homes without a judicial warrant, relying instead on administrative warrants to apprehend individuals with final removal orders. This policy shift allows entry to known addresses of individuals subject to removal, potentially bypassing the need for a warrant signed by a judge.
Just reemphasizing stout’s answer, here…
Interesting 4th Amendment implications, IMO. I’d bet this policy wouldn’t make it through judicial scrutiny in just about ANY court.
Depends on how much weight an executable federal deportation order from a judge actually carries.
Also, I wonder if the 4th Amendment would be applicable to those identified as harboring members of federally recognized terrorist groups like Tren de Aragua who have these removal orders on them?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:52 pm to BCreed1
[embed]United States v. Malagerio (5th Circuit):
The Ruling: The court upheld the arrest of a man who was removed from his home under an administrative warrant.
There are others[/embed]
"Appellant, a Canadian citizen not legally present in the United States, was arrested and charged with various firearms offenses following the execution of an administrative warrant at his trailer. Appellant unsuccessfully litigated a motion to suppress, claiming that agents exceeded the scope of the administrative warrant by arresting him not in a public place -- in the threshold of his trailer. The district court concluded that Appellant was not seized until after he had exited the trailer and that he was not located on any curtilage of the trailer.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed, finding that the district court's resolution of Appellant's motion to suppress was not clearly erroneous. “[A] person standing in the doorway of a house is ?in a “public” place,’ and hence subject to arrest without a warrant permitting entry of the home.” Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326, 335 (2001). The Fifth Circuit also held that the district court did not err in finding that Appellant consented to the search of his trailer following his arrest."
Your conclusion is incorrect. The court did not rule that they are allowed to enter his property on an administrative warrant. They ruled that he had consented.
The Ruling: The court upheld the arrest of a man who was removed from his home under an administrative warrant.
There are others[/embed]
"Appellant, a Canadian citizen not legally present in the United States, was arrested and charged with various firearms offenses following the execution of an administrative warrant at his trailer. Appellant unsuccessfully litigated a motion to suppress, claiming that agents exceeded the scope of the administrative warrant by arresting him not in a public place -- in the threshold of his trailer. The district court concluded that Appellant was not seized until after he had exited the trailer and that he was not located on any curtilage of the trailer.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed, finding that the district court's resolution of Appellant's motion to suppress was not clearly erroneous. “[A] person standing in the doorway of a house is ?in a “public” place,’ and hence subject to arrest without a warrant permitting entry of the home.” Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326, 335 (2001). The Fifth Circuit also held that the district court did not err in finding that Appellant consented to the search of his trailer following his arrest."
Your conclusion is incorrect. The court did not rule that they are allowed to enter his property on an administrative warrant. They ruled that he had consented.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:53 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
Wait until the next president sends ATF for MAGAs guns after labeling them domestic terrorists. Bet you’ll get different answers.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:56 pm to Pezzo
quote:
The slippery slope here is if there ever comes a time democrats get their way and pass a sweeping gun ban then they will use this same excuse to enter homes.
Exactly right.
This concept applies to both sides. Obama and Biden went to executive orders when they couldn’t move Congress.
Trump said hold my beer.
Despite the outcry, Trump is really just adopting the tactic of his predecessors.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 3:58 pm to stout
quote:
The memo simply states they are using administrative warrants.
quote:
Difference from Judicial Warrants:
While a judicial warrant is an order signed by a judge, an administrative warrant is signed by a federal officer. In scenarios where ICE agents present an administrative warrant, they generally cannot enter a home without the occupant's consent.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:27 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:27 pm to Kjnstkmn
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:30 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
No law enforcement should be be able to enter your home without a warrant and if there is no active investigation or criminal activity in process.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:32 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
quote:
Don’t fight the hypo; most of us would just let them in by consent.)
I would tell them no
I wouldn't get in a shoot out over it
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:37 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
I’m not an illegal and I’m not housing any illegals so I don’t have to worry about this scenario.
quote:
Always the single dumbest response to questions like this.
Stating facts commie
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:40 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
quote:
Can you resist? Can you use force?
Just to not let them in your house to search? No. This is what courts are for.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:40 pm to VOR
quote:
they’ve shown no hesitancy to use violence against citizens
I could argue they've shown pretty incredible restraint considering how the retards in the streets have been acting.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:44 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
Law enforcement is not the one to argue with. Comply. Live to prove that you were right- in court.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:51 pm to Aemonbundy66
quote:
Yeah because we have a legitimate legal system lmfao
Well then take the law into your own hands if you’re feeling froggy. Not my advice.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 5:09 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
Law enforcement is not the one to argue with. Comply. Live to prove that you were right- in court.
No doubt. But is it your right to resist?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 5:38 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
quote:
The question is not whether it’s wise. It isn’t.
If that's the question then the answer is "no, it isn't."
They likely outnumber you.
They are likely better trained at handling resistance than you are at being resistant.
They likely have more firepower than you.
But this is all hype generated by Leftists in an attempt to create a false narrative of ICE agents going house-to-house without warrants and without prior intel to drag people just suspected of being here illegally from their domicile. It's bullshite.
ICE agents showing up with a warrant are acting on information on people known to be here illegally. They are also resorting to administrative warrants because the MN political machinery has decided to go all-out in stopping them from doing their jobs, even to the point of purposely releasing illegals because of their illegal status. One estimate puts the number of those accused of violent crimes AND here illegally but released in MN somewhere around 1,300 (and that's likely low).
Here are a few:
German Adriano Llangari Inga (an illegal from Ecuador):
--Charged with criminal vehicular homicide in the August 2024 death of Victoria Eileen Harwell (a Minnesota resident). A test of a blood sample collected by police about 2½ hours later found his blood alcohol content was 0.141%, still well above the legal limit. He was released on August 6, 2024 without notification to ICE. Surprise, surprise... he didn't show up for his court date so he was arrested again on May 10, 2025, on an outstanding warrant for vehicular homicide. Three days later he was released again, and again without any notification to ICE.
Leny Odemel Ramirez-Santos (an illegal from Honduras):
--Charged with sexually assaulting a child and DUI, released rather than turning him over to ICE.
Edwin Amable Ashca Ninasuta (an illegal from Ecuador):
-Charged with lewd acts with a minor, released rather than turning him over to ICE.
Lenda Neh Mama Epse George (an illegal from Cameroon):
--Charged with abusing a child and domestic violence, released rather than turning him over to ICE.
Puol Both (an illegal from Sudan):
--Charged with making terroristic threats and first-degree aggravated robbery, released rather than turning him over to ICE.
Let me be clear on this for those who may still be on the fence or are cheering for MN's defiance of arresting and deporting illegals: what the political elite supporting this are really saying is that "we don't care who has to be robbed, beaten, abused, raped or killed as long as we believe it helps our politics."
Popular
Back to top


0





