New ICE Policy Paves Way for Officers to Work Without Judge's Warrant
Another U.S. citizen was shot and killed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers over the weekend in Minneapolis, amplifying the unrest growing across Minnesota and the rest of the country.
The news of the second shooting in less than two weeks comes just days after it was revealed that ICE has instituted a policy that allows officers to enter homes without having a judge's warrant. Here are the details of this newly revealed policy.
Newly Revealed ICE Memo Details Change in Warrant Policy
An internal memo issued in May of 2025 for ICE agents was revealed this week as the result of a whistleblower complaint. The memo details that officers are now allowed to enter homes without the use of a judicial warrant. Some Constitutional law experts are warning that this policy goes against the guardrails put in place as part of the Fourth Amendment.
The wording of the memo was first reported last week by the Associated Press (AP). According to the updated policy, ICE officers can forcefully enter homes relying on just administrative warrants. This change means that ICE is now able to bypass the neutral judges who had previously had to review evidence before providing a warrant.
The Fourth Amendment protects some of the most basic civil liberties guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution. The ban on warrantless searches on private property is a cornerstone of the nation's legal system; however, this Constitutional right is now being called into question.
In the past, ICE officers had arrested undocumented people through either a judicial warrant or an administrative warrant. While judicial warrants need to be signed by a judge, administrative warrants can be authorized by people working in the executive branch. This means that the administrative warrants fall under the jurisdiction of the president.
Judicial warrants allow law enforcement officials to enter and search a person's private property. This same allowance is not provided to administrative warrants, marking a key difference between the two.
The majority of immigration arrests happen under the umbrella of administrative warrants. The Trump administration has frequently expressed its frustrations about the limitations of judicial warrants, leading it to turn to the administrative variety to conduct ICE business.
Administrative warrants are typically signed by ICE officers when an immigration judge approves the removal of an undocumented immigrant. It is important to note that these immigration judges work under the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Attorney General. President Donald Trump calls these immigration judges "deportation judges."
Immigration policy experts are now sounding the alarm bell about the potential implications of this reported change in how ICE officers can enter homes. Without accountability built into the system, the immigration judges have more power to carry out potentially illegal deportations. In short, some legal experts say that the policy change essentially declares that the fundamental protections provided to Americans under the Fourth Amendment do not apply to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE.
DHS Response to Leaked Memo
DHS defended the memo through a statement released by agency spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin. In the statement, McLaughlin said that those who are served with administrative warrants already had “full due process and a final order of removal.” However, the agency's data indicates that thousands of people were issued removal orders last year after failing to show up in court for their immigration hearings.
In addition, critics of the Trump administration are pointing out that the memo was not widely distributed to ICE field offices. Instead, the change was shared verbally on a limited basis. This is in contrast to the prior policy changes that have been announced internally in official memos. It is being reported that many ICE officials only learned about the policy change when the report was leaked by the AP last week, leading the president's critics to say that the administration was trying to conceal the change in policy.
The release of the memo and its contents by the AP prompted widespread criticism from Democratic leaders. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut is demanding that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and acting ICE Director Todd Lyons testify before Congress about the policy change. Likewise, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz posted on X that “every American” should be “outraged by this assault on freedom and privacy.”
Trump officials are defending the policy change, saying that the new rule is “not a green light to randomly kick down doors.”
While it is unclear if this policy will remain in place, one thing that is clear is that the issue simply poured more gasoline onto an already tense situation. Anti-ICE protesters started the day marching in Minneapolis despite temperatures that were hovering below zero degrees. The unrest had already escalated prior to Saturday's shooting that claimed the life of 37-year-old Alex Pretti.
Did you find this content useful? Feel free to bookmark or to post to your timeline for reference later.