US judge rules ICE raids require warrants, contradicting secret ICE memo

Federal judge The state of Minnesota ruled last Saturday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents violated the Fourth Amendment after they forcefully entered a Minnesota man’s home without a warrant. The agents’ behavior closely mirrors a previously undisclosed ICE directive that allows claims agents to enter people’s homes using an administrative warrant, rather than a warrant signed by a judge.

The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan in response to a petition for a habeas corpus on January 17, did not assess the legality of ICE’s internal directive itself. But it clearly states that federal agents violated the U.S. Constitution when they entered a residence without consent and without a signed warrant from a judge — the same conditions that ICE leadership secretly told officers were sufficient for home arrest, according to a complaint filed by Whistleblower Aid, a nonprofit legal group that represents public and private whistleblowers.

In a sworn statement, Garrison Gibson, a Liberian national who lived in Minnesota for years under an ICE supervision order, said agents arrived at his home in the early morning of January 11 while his family was sleeping inside. He says he refused to open the door and repeatedly demanded to see a warrant. According to the announcement, the agents initially left, then returned with a larger group, deployed pepper spray toward neighbors who had gathered outside, and used a battering ram to force open the door.

The announcement was filed as part of a Jan. 12 Minnesota lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem challenging federal immigration enforcement operations in the Twin Cities, which state officials describe as an unconstitutional “invasion” by ICE and other agents that has upset Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Federal officials did not object to Gibson’s habeas corpus petition.

Gibson, who reportedly fled the Liberian civil war as a child, says agents entered his home without presenting a warrant. He said his wife, who was filming at the time, warned that there were children inside, and that agents with rifles stood at their door. “One client repeatedly claimed, ‘We have the papers,’ in response to her request to see the arrest warrant,” he says. “But without showing an arrest warrant, and apparently without one, five to six agents moved as if they were entering a war zone.”

Only after he was handcuffed, Gibson says, did agents show his wife an administrative note.

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

“We were there checking in, and the original officer said, ‘This looks good, I’ll be right back,’” Prokosch told The Associated Press. “And then there was a lot of chaos, and about five officers came out and then said, ‘We’re going to take him back into custody.’ I was like, ‘Really, do you want to do this again?’”

The re-arrest did not reverse the court’s finding that ICE violated the Fourth Amendment while entering a home without a warrant, but it underscores how the agency retains civil detention authority even if a judge rules that a particular detention was unconstitutional.

Court records reviewed by The Associated Press show Gibson’s criminal history consists of one felony conviction since 2008, along with minor traffic violations and low-level arrests. The 2008 conviction, which ICE cited in its deportation order, was reportedly later dismissed by the courts.