The ruling in federal court in Minnesota lands as Immigration and Customs Enforcement faces scrutiny over an internal memo claiming judge-signed warrants aren’t needed to enter homes without consent.
A federal judge in 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 judicial warrant.
The conduct of the agents closely mirrors a previously undisclosed ICE directive that claims agents are permitted to enter people’s homes using an administrative warrant, rather than a warrant signed by a judge.
The ruling, issued by US District Court judge Jeffrey Bryan in response to a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on January 17, did not assess the legality of ICE’s internal guidance itself. But it squarely holds that federal agents violated the United States Constitution when they entered a residence without consent and without a judge-signed warrant—the same conditions ICE leadership has privately told officers is sufficient for home arrests, according to a complaint filed by Whistleblower Aid, a nonprofit legal group representing whistleblowers from the public and private sector.
And who cares about the rest as it’s irrelevant. Ice will do what it wants and doesn’t give a shit about judges or their rulings, and judges won’t enforce their tulings.
So if a judge says something about ice, it doesn’t matter. If he makes a ruling about ice, it doesn’t matter.
There is no news here, call me when a judge, any judge, somehow enforces their rulings.
You mean like Judge Dredd?
Niko Bellic is particularly good at law. This part of his resume stood out to me:
He looks like a great fit for the anti-corruption law team. Thumbs up from me for a hire.