US Judge Rules ICE Raids Require Legal Warrants, Clashes With Secret ICE Memo

A federal judge Minnesota ruled last Saturday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents violated the Fourth Amendment after they forcibly entered a Minnesota man’s home without a warrant. The agents’ behavior mirrors ICE’s previously undisclosed directive that prosecutors be allowed to enter people’s homes using a search warrant, rather than a warrant signed by a judge.

The decision, issued by US District Court Judge Jeffrey Bryan in response to a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on January 17, did not examine the legality of ICE’s own internal guidelines. But it clearly held that federal agents violated the United States Constitution when they entered a residence without permission and without a warrant signed by a judge—the same conditions ICE leadership has told officials in private are sufficient for house arrest, according to a complaint filed by Whistleblower Aid, a nonprofit legal group that represents whistleblowers from the public and private sectors.

In an affidavit, Garrison Gibson, a native of Liberia who has lived in Minnesota for years under the supervision of ICE, says that agents came to his home in the early morning hours of January 11 while his family was sleeping inside. He says he refused to open the door and demanded to see the warrant. According to the announcement, the agents first left, returned with a large group, pepper-sprayed the neighbors gathered outside, and then used the doorbell to open the door.

The announcement was filed as part of a January 12 lawsuit in Minnesota against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem challenging immigration enforcement operations in the Twin Cities, which state officials describe as an illegal “invasion” by ICE and other agents who have raided Minneapolis and Saint Paul.

Federal officials did not oppose Gibson’s habeas petition.

Gibson, who reportedly fled Liberia’s civil war as a child, says agents entered his home without showing a warrant. His wife, who was filming at the time, warned that there were children inside, saying that agents with guns stood at their door. “One agent kept saying ‘We are getting the documents’ in response to his request to see the warrant,” he said. “But without showing a warrant, and apparently without having one, five to six agents walked in like they were walking into a war zone.”

It was only after he was handcuffed, Gibson said, that agents showed his wife the warrant.

One day after a judge ordered Gibson’s immediate release, ICE agents took him back into custody when he showed up for an immigration check at a Minnesota immigration office, according to his attorney, Marc Prokosch, who said Gibson arrived believing the court order had resolved the matter.

“We were there to go in, and the actual officer said, ‘This looks good, I’ll be back,'” Prokosch told the Associated Press. “Then there was a big commotion, about five policemen came out and said, ‘We will take him back to the cell.’ I said, ‘Really, you want to do this again?'”

The retrial did not reverse the court’s finding that ICE violated the Fourth Amendment during the warrantless home invasion, but it underscores how the agency retains the authority to detain people even if a judge rules that a particular arrest was unconstitutional.

Court records reviewed by The Associated Press show that Gibson’s criminal history consists of one felony conviction dating back to 2008, as well as minor traffic violations and minor arrests. The 2008 case, which ICE cited in his removal order, was reportedly dismissed by the courts.