🚨HOLY CRAP. An ICE whistleblower just revealed a secret memo authorizing ICE officers to break into homes without a judicial warrant, which DHS's own legal training materials say is unconstitutional!
ICE then hid the memo from the public, passing it along by word of mouth.
ICE secretly told its officers that any time someone has been ordered removed, ICE can break down their door.
It has been accepted for generations that the only thing which can authorize agents to break into your home is a warrant signed by a judge. No wonder ICE hid this memo!
Chillingly, the whistleblower says that ICE trainers were directed (no paper trail?) to train all of ICE's new recruits that these administrative warrants authorize breaking into peoples' homes, even though DHS's own training materials still make clear that's illegal!
The memo cites no legal authority, only a further secret DHS General Counsel (replaced early on by a Trump loyalist) opinion saying administrative warrants filled out by an ICE officer authorize breaking into homes of people ordered removed. Here's what such a warrant looks like.
This is the Trump administration trashing the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution in pursuit of its mass deportation agenda.
Worse, a footnote to this memo suggest they won't even rule out authorizing home invasions with no judicial warrant for people not even ordered removed!
In short, this secret memo explains SO MUCH of what we've been seeing over the last months, including this raid of a home in Minneapolis where ICE officers presented no judicial warrant before breaking in the door.
Turns out they were secretly told they don't need one!
In a sign of how explosive ICE knew this secret memo would be, one whistleblower says he was only allowed to read the memo and was barred from taking note, and warned that employees had been punished for disagreeing.
At least one ICE instructor resigned rather than teach it!
At a time of unprecedented daily scandals, this this whistleblower complaint, and the memo it reveals for the first time, breaks through for me as beyond the pale.
It's the federal government conspiring in secret to subvert the Fourth Amendment.
Noem was confused by the question and defaulted to a different claim ICE makes; that 70% of people *arrested* by ICE have a prior criminal record or pending charges (also way down from January 2025).
As I've documented, that hasn't been true for MONTHS.
HOWEVER, total ICE arrests include thousands of people in criminal custody who are being transferred to ICE.
As of October, 2 out of 3 people arrested by ICE outside of a custodial setting, i.e. in American communities, have no criminal record. That's what Americans are seeing.
Link to the article here, which lays out the entire shocking story; a full-blown job offer was extended despite @LauraJedeed never completing any of the required paperwork.
@LauraJedeed Read the rest of the article. After she submitted the drug test (that she should have failed because she's a user of legal cannabis), and despite having never submitted ANY other paperwork, ICE gave her a final job offer and a duty assignment.
There is nothing more inimical to the principles that our country was founded on than a government official declaring that due process should be tossed aside.
Everyone is entitled to due process. Everyone. We thought it so important we wrote it into the Constitution TWICE.
Of course the Constitution doesn’t spell out what “due process” means in every context. It doesn’t do that for ANY process. That’s why we have laws passed by Congress and judicial precedent.
And in this context, there are laws, rules, and regulations that must be followed.
In every single major immigration raid so far, the MAJORITY of people arrested by DHS officers have no criminal record whatsoever — not even any traffic violations or misdemeanors.
In Washington, DC, it was 84% of all those arrested. In Los Angeles, 57%. In Illinois, 66%.
That is simply not true. Not only is being undocumented not a crime, but to have a criminal record requires someone to have been arrested for an offense in the past.
Neither of those offenses are relevant to the question of whether being undocumented is a crime, nor the question of whether a person who may have committed a crime for which they weren't charged can accurately be described as "having a criminal record."
This is FALSE. As the Supreme Court spelled out very clearly 125 years ago, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” refers to three categories of exceptions, two ancient and one uniquely American.
- Children of diplomats
- Children of occupying soldiers
- Native Americans
Mr. Wong’s parents were ineligible for citizenship in a way today’s permanent residents are not. And the Court was clear that the 14th Amendment codified the ancient rule of birthright citizenship.
Also, Trump’s EO claims to bar citizenship even for children of ppl here legally.
That is exactly what the excerpt says. Read it again. “The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment … would appear to have been to exclude … (besides children of members of the Indian tribes…), the two classes of cases” recognized in common law.
Obviously I have little sympathy for this guy, given his offenses. But I do want to explain why it is that this man was still in the country and not deported under any previous admin, including the first Trump admin.
In short - because for 50+ years, Cuba refused deportations.
Florida's sex offender registry says that Mr. Milian has two convictions relating to a single court case from 1996. So he's been deportable for at least 29 years.
But from 1965 to 2017, Cuba refused to accept any deportations of people who were inside the United States. Period.
The result of this diplomatic impasse means that for 50+ years, Cuban noncitizens convicted of a crime in the U.S. and ordered removed were mostly treated like regular American ex-con. After they did their time they'd be transferred to immigration custody and eventually released.