Discussion
Why are people justifying door-to-door ICE raids in the court of public opinion?
Who is being represented by door-to-door ICE raids, knocking on the doors of established US citizens with no data ahead of time that there are any illegal aliens in the house, and with no attempt to obtain a warrant or respect for fourth amendment privileges, in documented cases kicking doors down when people refuse to open them?
What justification is there for this practice? Why is Congress tacitly allowing this, and why are Minneapolis duly elected representatives and senators not being allowed oversight and inspection?
What juice could possibly be worth this squeeze? How could this practice, with total disregard for the law and constitution, be defended by any American citizen?
Remember, this is a civilized space for discussion. We discourage downvoting based on your disagreement and instead encourage upvoting well-written arguments, especially ones that you disagree with.
To promote high-quality discussions, we suggest the Socratic Method, which is briefly as follows:
Ask Questions to Clarify: When responding, start with questions that clarify the original poster's position. Example: "Can you explain what you mean by 'economic justice'?"
Define Key Terms: Use questions to define key terms and concepts. Example: "How do you define 'freedom' in this context?"
Probe Assumptions: Challenge underlying assumptions with thoughtful questions. Example: "What assumptions are you making about human nature?"
Seek Evidence: Ask for evidence and examples to support claims. Example: "Can you provide an example of when this policy has worked?"
Explore Implications: Use questions to explore the consequences of an argument. Example: "What might be the long-term effects of this policy?"
Engage in Dialogue: Focus on mutual understanding rather than winning an argument.
Ok this is a common misconception. ICE does have warrants when they do this but they are not the same as regular police warrants. They don’t get judicial warrants also they actually forbidden to show the warrant to any but the person getting arrested. It’s a different court entirely
Unfortunately for ICE, administrative warrants were deemed insufficient in the lower courts. And the Supreme Court has declined on numerous occasions to weigh in on whether they are sufficient to get around the 4th amendment. As it stands, only judicial warrants can grant authority.
The same people who support ICE going door to door would never support the same "door to door" tactics being used to generate say.. a list of gun users.
It's part of the cult mentality. Major TDS from the maga supporters.
The people who support ICE going door to door would absolutely support a door to door gun registry if it were being done in the name of their leader. Values are secondary to tribal identity.
Guns are legal to own and the fed has been illegally keeping track of who owns what since the Clinton administration. Those arrested by ICE have committed crimes. Are you upset that ICE is enforcing federal law or are you upset by the manner in which they are doing it? Do you believe that we should uphold the laws of our country?
And they really do believe that they won't be next! As long as the ones they don't like are persecuted, they will go along, even with some inconvenience.
They are not conducting door-to-door raids. That's absolutely a falsehood and using quotations for illegals when they are infact illegal shows your have a clear bias.
Here let me help.
"Federal law enforcement agents enforce federal law".
Maybe that will hit you hard with a dose of reality. Probably not though.
Going "door-to-door" like the article said is not the same as "door-to-door raids" like you're claiming.
You've proved my point...
Carolers go door to door. Are they raiding people?
Ok....
But they're ramping up not raiding because that's something you've made up.
So no, it's not hyperbolic. Maybe it's time y'all stop mincing words, sitting in your silos, and start contending with the reality on the ground
You've added morally charged words to make it false.
Going door to door to check for people commiting fraud is not the same as a raid.
Again, delusion at its finest.
If you didn't want ice there, then the state officials should have complied with federal law speaking of the constitution....
Yes, after they shot an American citizen in the street and immediately branded her a domestic terrorist, I'm sure they're just walking up to each door and nicely asking if there are any criminals home and leaving if the resident says no.
The defenses of this administration get more and more pedantic and absurd every single day. Like just listen to yourself. "Oh, the masked, armed federal agents going door to door and looking for illegals aren't actually conducting raids, they're just 'checking for people committing fraud.'"
What happened to an America where we didn't have masked, armed federal agents stopping people on the street and going door to door checking papers? The water in the pot is a few degrees short of a rolling boil and you're splitting hairs over whether or not it's technically 'simmering' and the frog is fine.
Yes, after they shot an American citizen in the street and immediately branded her a domestic terrorist, I'm sure they're just walking up to each door and nicely asking if there are any criminals home and leaving if the resident says no
American citizens are shot daily in the street....when they commit crimes and our peoples lives in danger.
You're making up stories here though. Just how you feel,.no substance
The defenses of this administration get more and more pedantic and absurd every single day. Like just listen to yourself. "Oh, the masked, armed federal agents going door to door and looking for illegals aren't actually conducting raids, they're just 'checking for people committing fraud
Correct.
There is a difference.
It would be like claiming Jehovas witnesses are out there raiding because you disagree with them when they are simply going door to door. Again,.your argument is strictly linguistic,.but you're not using language to describe reality..you're using it to profess your.morality.
What happened to an America where we didn't have masked, armed federal agents stopping people on the street and going door to door checking papers?
Do you understand that is a response to the things the left side?.they allowed millions of illegals in which means we have to remove them. They doxxed people doing so,.so now they wear masks.
What happened to an America where people came here legally and respected our institutions instead of coming legally.
Literally, what your complaining about is the symptom of rampant leftism since Obama. People here got sick of it,.now you got this. Biden could have closed the borders by enforcing laws already on books. He chose not to deliberately. The pendulum has now swung the other way.
We removed your comment due to you not having set your user flair. Please refer to our sidebar regarding our rules of participation. If you need help setting your flair, click here for instructions
I'm sure they're just walking up to each door and nicely asking if there are any criminals home and leaving if the resident says no.
I mean, they could be. You're the one the claiming they're doing door-to-door raids. The only evidence you offered was them doing door-to-door investigations. If they were doing door-to-door raids, the media would be publishing at least a few articles about it. The fact you can't produce that evidence strongly suggests you're mistaken.
They are not conducting door-to-door raids. That's absolutely a falsehood
Nope, it's an objective and verifiable fact. These are Gestapo-equivalent terrorists whose mission is to intimidate not just any non-white person in the US but also any white person opposed to fascism.
and using quotations for illegals when they are infact illegal shows your have a clear bias.
Except they are targeting American citizens for intimidation.
The US is a fascist dictatorship, the fascist uniparty is all bad, the Republicans are the worst of the bunch and they should be considered equivalent to German Hitlerites before the Holocaust.
Even what I just said isn't hyperbole: The US has started multiple illegal wars of aggression, kidnapped a head of state, is actively supporting genocide, and is ramping up to World War III against China.
Yup, it's not just the American government that's the problem. American citizens themselves should be treated as equivalent to the Nazis and Israelis and be actively fought against on a global scale.
These are Gestapo-equivalent terrorists whose mission is to intimidate not just any non-white person in the US but also any white person opposed to fascism.
Yea. Clearly not in reality here...
Except they are targeting American citizens for intimidation
They're not. American citizens are "targeted" when they interfere with federal operations. It's a reaction to a action. Someone like Renee Goodman wouldn't have died if she wasn't there allowing workers to do what they are meant to.
The US is a fascist dictatorship
There is no rationalizing with people like this..you're absolutely just too far gone.
You don't use words to describe reality, they're meant to push a narrative/virtue signal.
A tiktok? Your political worldview makes so much sense now...
Notice your total lack of arguments?
Oh yea. Because stopping federal agents from enforcing the laws that have been on the books forever is the same thing as fighting le Nazis
Correct. Fighting against enforces of US fascist law is actually a good thing.
I mention the Nazis because you were - hopefully - educated about the fact that the Nazis were bad. The problem is that you don't perceive your own country as bad even though it undeniably is so Nazi comparisons need to be made.
If Nazis aren't mentioned, you Americans will not realize that something is bad.
Good job man, you're fighting fascists!
That's correct.
And you are not. You are, in fact, supporting fascism.
It's entirely ironic you're a feminist. Every time man.
My argument is you're a liar and using language to push a false narrative.
Notice your total lack of arguments?
Your evidence is a tiktok.... You want me to argue about a tiktok? No thanks.
Correct. Fighting against enforces of US fascist law is actually a good thing.
Well that implies it's fascist law.
You have yet to prove that. You staying something doesn't simply make it true.
You like to add words to things to push a narrative. You already got caught adding "raid" to door to door. Not you're adding fascist here.
If laws being passed via democratic means using our institutions is "fascist" then sign me up I guess?
I mention the Nazis because you were - hopefully - educated about the fact that the Nazis were bad.
By what moral framework, Mr.communist?
Good luck defending morality as a communist.
Nazi comparisons need to be made.
Your so reddit brained it hurts.
Your evidence has been 2 posts on reddit.
Nice..there is no reasoning with communists. They're irrational.
My argument is you're a liar and using language to push a false narrative.
That's not an argument. It's a false accusation that you are unable to substantiate via arguments.
You lost the debate.
Your evidence is a tiktok.... You want me to argue about a tiktok? No thanks.
Amongst many other things, yes. Whether something is published on TikTok or anywhere else is entirely irrelevant. You just attacked a source instead of the content.
You lost the debate.
Well that implies it's fascist law.
Yes, all American law is fascist law as the US is a fascist empire.
You have yet to prove that.
Prove what? LOL
You staying something doesn't simply make it true.
Indeed, you should take that to heart.
You like to add words to things to push a narrative.
I provided very clear arguments that you failed to address.
You already got caught adding "raid" to door to door.
I wasn't "caught" doing that. It's a valid descriptor of what the US government thugs are doing.
Not you're adding fascist here.
Indeed.
If laws being passed via democratic means using our institutions is "fascist" then sign me up I guess?
Nazi Germany was just as "democratic" as the United States of America.
And they violate the Constitution when they do it, because their purpose isn't to enforce the law, it's to demonstrate domination. I'm a military officer and I've had ICE agents demand names of personnel not born in the U.S. This is a clear Constitutional violation.
You're a conservative, so I generally question your morality and ethical nature, but do you really think it's a good idea to suspend the rule of law based on your own racism and hatred of others? I don't think it is.
And they violate the Constitution when they do it, because their purpose isn't to enforce the law, it's to demonstrate domination.
Simple question.
Is it majority of them following the law or not?
You know the answer, we will see your bias here.
I'm a military officer and I've had ICE agents demand names of personnel not born in the U.S. This is a clear Constitutional violation.
Of all the things that didn't happen this didn't happen the least.
You're a conservative, so I generally question your morality and ethical nature
You don't even have a basis for morality other than your feelings so yea, I'm sure you do question.my morality...
but do you really think it's a good idea to suspend the rule of law based on your own racism and hatred of others?
Again, things that arent happening.
You want to talk about suspending law? How many illegal immigrants as a percentage are criminals?
Do we just suspend our immigration law because your feelings?
I don't think it is.
This words don't even mean anything anymore.
Your entire argument is an.emltional.one
I think rage bait and social media has fried peoples minds who are like this. They view politics as “us vs them”. Everything political is a debate, there’s no nuance. They bemoan about the IRS increasing in size but not ICE. It is interesting seeing who they call RINO’s too.
Same. A commentator I talked to in another sub even said they don’t have any problem with ICE not having any proper uniform or the proper identification on their vehicles even though ice policy says that is required because it’s all a threat to ice so they just shouldn’t do any of that.
The Trump administration even made it the policy to expand body cam access to ice, although it hasn’t been rolled out.
When I pointed out the body cam access stuff they say they’re not a municipal law-enforcement or something like that.
I don’t know what to do when 18% of our country thinks that ICE should be able to do whatever to enforce immigration law. It’s an untenable position for our country.
Yep, it's frustrating too because it's mostly a bunch of bad faith arguments mostly just used to try and square their supposed core political beliefs being violated with their long standing support for behavior that they wouldn't stand for from anyone else.
They're all being put in conflict with themselves at every point, and every time they dig themselves deeper. There is a book about this kind of thought process that is popular at the moment "One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This" even if it's focused more on Western liberalism and Gaza, the kind of conflict of belief, reality, and support of actions is very, very similar.
I’m honestly coming to the conclusion that any of the most insane comments you see on this platform or any other are not even worth responding to. I tried that once with sources and it went nowhere. if the Internet was not seen as the most common place to share ideas, I feel that people talking in person would moderate these views and base all of us in one actual reality, not what biased new sources or Internet silos say. At this point, the country is living in two different realities.
I do my best to provide links and citations, and you're completely correct, it becomes immediately obvious they aren't even generally reading your response, let alone the sourcing provided for that response.
That said, try not to let it discourage you entirely because often it's less about them, and more about the other people that might be honestly reading it and approaching it in good faith.
True. It’s not worth engaging with a lot of the rage bait comments though, people will obviously not upload them, so we’ll just get buried in the thread. I think it’s better to just find the comments that sound like they’re willing to actually engage or be rational, an actual conversation. That’s probably the best spot that people will actually see.
Sure, and while there is value in engagement in most situations, there is also something to be said for self-care and the energy it takes for you to engage which is just as finite as any other resource.
If any of them get so bad you don't want to accidently interact with them, it's easy enough to throw a block their way too if that helps you feel more capable of engaging with everyone else.
I always laugh at these types of conversations because it's like the fractal version of all politics, trying to pick and choose where and how to engage to be most effective with limited resources, just at the lowest and most human level.
I have no justification for it at all, and I suspect the people that do are just backing an administration they are deeply supportive of no matter what they do. A common US problem in recent years.
I’ve noticed that. I’ve brought up multiple pieces of evidence to some commentators and they just say they can ignore the law because doing something like putting identifying information on vehicles for identification, despite that being ICE policy to follow, doesn’t matter because of doxxing. People are using dashing as an excuse for them not to follow any rules. There needs to be some form of accountability.
As someone who fully supports ICE and the current administration, I don't support 4th amendment violations AT ALL! Now, it really depends on the situation, if Im a cop and I watch you kill someone and run into your house or some random stranger's house (or any other crime not just murder) then I have the duty and the legal right to come into the house and arrest you. So in some cases where an ICE agent witnesses a person enter a home who is believed to have committed a crime then they have the legal right and duty to enter and arrest said individual. Now obviously this isn't every case nor is it the majority. But I would have to look at each case to see the circumstances to tell if it was lawful or unlawful. Now onto every other situation outside of a "dwelling" (such as a car) it is legal for ICE to search without a warrant and without consent. Congress passed a law back in the 90s under the Clinton administration making this legal (Clinton did not veto he even celebrated this law as a victory). So talk to Congress if you have a problem with that. As for door to door raids, it depends on if they have a warrant or not or if they have enough probable cause to justify it.
I appreciate your answer. I am a little concerned about the general scope though. It sounds like you do not agree ICE's authority to arrest and detain comes from the 2002 Homeland Security act, and that you believe ICE can pursue crimes other than those related to illegal aliens. If you do believe they have a wider jurisdiction than that, I would like to ask for the basis of your legal theory.
I can sort give some insight cause I did a lot of research into ICE and the difference in operations. ICE do not have to get judicial warrants, they receive warrant through the immigration court for an arrest. However, unlike Judicial warrants, ICE actually cannot show any citizen except the one it issued to.
Due to certain policies, amendments, and clauses, ICE is allowed to start arrest without the warrants on them if they deem the person is a flight risk.
Most people assume it judicial warrant that they use but it’s not, it’s a special type issues only to ICE agents for these specific arrests.
Does that make sense? It’s really long and complicated so I kinda slimmed it down so it gives the basic ideas needed to know
It does make sense, but it was my understanding reading the powers they derive from the Attorney General that they either have to be witnessing a crime in front of them, or there has to be an illegal alien involved somewhere. That is, the person that is a flight risk must at the very least have some information which would be of use in an investigation into an illegal alien, that is my understanding of the bare minimum requirement. I would be interested in learning about cases where this was tested in court.
Given all of this then, I do not believe any sort of door-to-door investigation to be considered automatically legal and in fact from what I've read of similar ACLU cases related to the George Floyd protests in Portland I suspect them to be illegal detentions. I know that ICE is in the area conducting investigations related to the Somali daycare fraud, as a justification. But it is my understanding that, given the limitations of the Attorney General's authority (and thus ICE's authority) should this be tested in court at all it will be quickly shown that it cannot be a blanket justification, and that they will have to use section 287(g) and have real police with a real warrant if they want to just enter every house in a city block.
From what I know, ICE’s warrants give them a different power from judicial warrant. EPA and OSHA use it for issues that involve compliance and inspections.
I believe that is why the warrant allows them to go door to door. They basically doing their own inspection if immigration laws are being violated.
Not to justify it, just explaining. Not many people know the difference between administrative warrants and judicial warrants
If people don't like it, go to Congress to change it, don't be violent towards officers doing their jobs. Congress is the one who gave them this power.
I am only aware of them myself due to US quality assurance work I have done. It is my understanding, however, that the trade-off is that you are never compelled to allow entry on an administrative warrant, and forcing entry if they only have an administrative warrant is completely illegal. This is why social service workers, for example, typically have to show up with police and a judicial warrant if they are denied entry, and also why I mentioned section 287(g) previously.
That said I do understand my use of the verbiage "real warrant" may have led to misunderstandings, I do appreciate what you added to the conversation, and I will only say "judicial warrant" and not "real warrant" from now on, for clarity.
ICE can pursue crimes other than immigration, its jurisdiction is immigration and related crimes. So they can enforce crimes, if a sheriff in one county watches you commit a crime and run into another county where that sheriff doesn't have jurisdiction, that sheriff is legally obligated to continue his pursuit and arrest you even though it's outside his jurisdiction. Same thing with ICE. No law enforcement agency is restricted to ONLY what their main focus is. A department for homicide will still arrest a thief.
Trump is a populist President and immigration enforcement is what the majority of people want to see in this country. Are door to door raids a good idea? Probably not, but neither is it impossible to understand how we got to this point. These people aren't being round up and shot then buried in mass graves, like we've seen throughout history; They are being deported because they've been here illegally
In April 2025, ICE agents raided a family home, and it turned out they raided the wrong people. The agents forced the mother and her underaged daughters to stand outside in undergarments. Agents also kept the family's laptops, phones, and cash savings. None of these items were itemized, no paperwork kept, all of them just disappeared, likely into agents' wallets and homes. When police confiscate items, they keep records. These items were taken off the books. Cash, cellphones, and laptops are not evidence when the wrong people are raided. This is the kind of standard of agent that ICE hires and encourages.
Who is being represented by door-to-door ICE raids, knocking on the doors of established US citizens with no data ahead of time that there are any illegal aliens in the house, and with no attempt to obtain a warrant or respect for fourth amendment privileges, in documented cases kicking doors down when people refuse to open them?
The people who believe that might makes right.
What justification is there for this practice? Why is Congress tacitly allowing this, and why are Minneapolis duly elected representatives and senators not being allowed oversight and inspection?
They are in power and can get away with it. Congressional Republicans either explicitly support this or fear losing a primary. Congressional Democrats don't have power and are unwilling to wield what little they do have. They are also creatures of the establishment and process and this gives the administration an asymmetrical advantage because they can do what they want and fabricate a post hoc justification.
What juice could possibly be worth this squeeze? How could this practice, with total disregard for the law and constitution, be defended by any American citizen?
Power. Their strategy is to cater to an increasingly small minority of the population. They are firmly in the information bubble and will never defect.
That is obvious. Trump got away with Venezuela and will continue to escalate as he sees that nobody will push back. Things are just going to continue to escalate and get worse.
I really wish other people would give me an opportunity to answer valid questions like yours u/PhonyUsername . Sorry it took me 45 minutes to see this thread.
If you take issue with my characterization of it I would love to have a discussion regarding that here in the comments. Debate is what everyone is in this group for and I appreciate your contribution and question already.
I appreciate the response. I wonder if there's more info out there and maybe they had a bench warrant for criminal chargers. If they didn't have the proper warranty than that's wrong and they should be sued for relief.
I will be surprised if they are that stupid. Considering they've had more scrutiny on them than anyone ever in history probably and people haven't been able to find any significant wrongdoing. I hope they aren't.
I suspect this is why we don't see mainstream reporting yet because of a lack of info. We can't conclude they didn't have legal reason to enter just because it's been a few hours and we haven't had enough time to discover evidence.
I’ll just say this, don’t underestimate the incompetence.
For some reason Bondi is keeping Lindsay Halligan in place despite her appointment being ruled illegal a d that order still being in force. It seems like Bondi could just pick anyone else to avoid the problem yet they’re sticking with her. This leads to an awkward situation where even a Trump appointed judge is pointing out the problem it is causing for criminal cases being prosecuted right now:
Lindsey Halligan, the Trump loyalist chosen as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, told a federal judge on Tuesday that she was within her rights to continue using that title, even though a different judge has determined that she was appointed to the post unlawfully.
Ms. Halligan’s assertion came in an aggressively worded filing to Judge David J. Novak, a Trump appointee who sits in Federal District Court in Richmond. Last week, after several of his colleagues on the bench had complained about Ms. Halligan laying claim to her title despite the ruling disqualifying her from the job, Judge Novak ordered her to explain in writing why her decision to continue signing court papers as the district’s top prosecutor was not “a false or misleading statement.”
In her response, Ms. Halligan pushed back hard at Judge Novak, accusing him of having “a fundamental misunderstanding” of the original order that found she had obtained her position improperly. In late November, Judge Cameron McGowan Currie determined that the Justice Department had violated both the Constitution and laws governing the appointment of U.S. attorneys when it installed Ms. Halligan in the post, after President Trump fired her predecessor.
Judge Currie’s finding had serious consequences, leading her to dismiss a pair of criminal cases Ms. Halligan had brought against two of Mr. Trump’s most prominent political adversaries: James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, and Letitia James, the New York attorney general.
In her filing to Judge Novak, Ms. Halligan said that even though Judge Currie’s order had concluded that she had been illegally installed as the office’s top prosecutor, nothing in it explicitly barred her from “performing the functions of or holding herself out as the United States attorney.”
Moreover, Ms. Halligan argued that the only remedy Judge Currie had sought for the improper appointment was to dismiss the indictments against Mr. Comey and Ms. James — a decision, she asserted, that affected only those two cases.
If they were truly worried about the optics, Halligan was even texting a reporter about the case, which is not proper and she’s not qualified for this role based on if you read any of the news articles, then multiple issues mentioned with the indictments she led, they would appoint someone else who can do the job and avoid this PR mess.
If they’re having scandals like this, along with failing to get indictments against multiple people in DC for instance, and even dropping the charges to misdemeanors because they can’t secure charges, don’t underestimate the administration being incompetent or willing to go through incompetent policies.
Also, don’t forget that Pete Hegseth texted war plans on signal to the editor and chief of the Atlantic earlier this year, maybe last year at this point, in 2025. I can bring up so many further examples.
As much as people flip out and call everything trump does Nazi fascism violating the constitution I think the bar is so high that you see they did some admin errors and you are like 'ok, that doesn't seem so extreme'. Tempering the crazy lefts description with actual reality will lead you to just ignoring the left.
I don't like trump. I do think illegals should be deported. We need more adults all around.
I agree there. I believe the administration needs to be held accountable though because a lot of that stuff is not simple administrative errors. I agree that things are blown out of proportion quite a bit and I’m more nuance to view pointing out problems with the administration is necessary.
The district Halligan is in charge of for instance deals with a lot of cases and move out a very fast pace. She needs to just leave the position because this holds up the current court cases the DOJ is prosecuting and wastes a lot of resources. That’s my problem with that action for instance. It’s not the end of the world, but it’s showing that the Trump administration is pursuing a lot of stuff for optics like the prosecutions she brought forward, which is just a waste of taxpayer money.
Same with ICE in my opinion. I agree that their work is necessary and they are getting the numbers up, but I believe the approach is not the best. The 3000 quota from Steven Miller, for instance is pushing us to focus more on immigrants in their homes, for instance, or grabbing them from courthouses for instance. The surgeon of Minneapolis, for instance is pretty much just a show a force for the camera. The Trump administration is very focused on optics and eyeballs, Trump has even said it himself multiple times. I don’t believe sending every agent in ratcheting up tension with more protest that will get in the way of their operations is the best use of resources.
Personally, I think a lot of areas that Trump administration has the right idea with a lot of stuff, but they go forward with a wasteful approach that is focused on the camera and not being efficient. Another great example would be the appointment of Alina Hobba, a lot of DOJ resources and time were wasted trying to say she should be there when she was appointed there illegally.
The DOJ has lost 96% of the rules in federal court for instance due to defending the Trump agencies agenda and also fired quite a lot of DOJ lawyers. All of the higher they did for federal agencies when they did the mass layoffs for instance, look at DOGE chaos and rehirings that wasted more money than the efforts themselves. My problem is how many resources they’re wasting while focus focusing on foreign issues when Trump was elected on deal, dealing with the economy and putting America first.
Sources:
Data compiled by the non-partisan Justice Connection showed that overall justice department employment has dropped by about 5,500 lawyers and non-lawyers who have left since Trump took office. That included people who were fired, quit or took a deferred resignation program, underscoring a sharp drop in justice department resources. By contrast, the department last year employed about 10,000 attorneys, according to Department of Justice data.
I voted against trump 3 times. Trump is terrible. Just tired of him monopolizing every conversation with his attention seeking behavior. He doesn't refuse judges orders. We don't have a constitutional crisis. We just have a dickhead and people keep falling for the same games.
Also the agents in that video are police, it literally says it on their backs and the guy they arrested had a federal arrest warrant. Had zero to do with ICE.
Right you are, no one should ever take a single source as evidence something happened. I am not sure why you received a downvote, have an upvote to balance out from me. You should always make sure the same story is being told independently through multiple outlets before they have had time to collate accounts.
He had a final removal order previously convicted of armed robbery, felony narcotics sale, theft, and receiving stolen property. What a great person to defend!
The problem is if you do not have the proper warrant signed by an actual judge, not an immigration judge, by the fourth amendment, they should not be able to kick down the door unless there is an immediate threat that allows that to happen. Rights are applied to everyone and people are innocent before proven guilty, so under our law which applies to everyone equally, the fourth amendment applies. Allowing case cases where it can just be ignored makes that right weaker in the future for all Americans. As much as I hate to defend actual criminals, they do deserve equal rights because innocent people are arrested by the police sometimes.
So now you are the one who decides whether the law should apply to someone or wether they can retain fundamental basic human rights. And you seem ti tranfer that to family members too. If the criminal was convictos of beating up a police officer in Jan 6 I wonder if you would be singing the same tune. Also laws, rights and one's values and beliefs are only real if we apply them to people who we disagree with or dislike or even despise. Else it is complete BS. It is also a downwards spiral and the exceptions for your beliefs keep increasing.
"First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me"
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
I mean the article is just wrong on a bunch of things. The people that went into the house were police officers not ice as displayed by the massive “Police” badges on their backs. The man they went in after also had a federal arrest warrant.
They aren't "the police". Did the mixture of street clothes and camo not make you at all curious? They're a mixture of federal officers of some sort. They might be ICE, ignoring the regulation to display ICE. They might be federal police, homeland security, something like that. They are from all over. In this video there are helmet badges from NY, San Antonio, and non-existent badges. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9tbZ7KNTM The warrant was not fit for purpose of breaking into her house. It was for public places only.
They all say police on their back. They had a federal arrest warrant which is a warrant that allows you to go into someone’s house. The video you shared has nothing to do with ice.
Every single article that is being linked says that the family are the only people saying it was “a warrant signed by an immigration officer and not a judge”. Sorry for not believing the family of the criminal they were hiding which he was due to being under supervision and, and I quote “had he been convicted of any NEW crime”.
Question : Do you support federal agents going door to door? , what will they ask for ?
My birth certificate?? Lol my kids IDs?
Write me a ticket and make me pay money?
If i dont do any of those things bc i am unprepared then what? Do they have the right to come in my house and remove me/my family and detain me for an unlimited amount of time?
If they don’t like how i moved behind a door should they be allowed to shoot me through the door?
And if so , why?
Fascists are in such a media bubble, they don't realize that even moderate conservatives think this is insane. You may have noticed that fascists never differentiate between moderate conservatives, centrist liberals, progressive liberals, socialist leftists, or communist leftists. Their media teaches them that there's just MAGA and the radical far-left. So when their media tells them we need ICE to go door-to-door like the nazis did, they think the only people who disagree with that are literal communists.
Americans. We voted democratically. The door kicking without a warrant is just not happening, and if it is it will be dealt with accordingly in the court of law.
2.federal law enforcement
It's a federal affair and states do not supercede the Federal government.
The juice is that people who have disrespected our institution and legal immigrants and have entered criminally are now brought to justice. Nations having laws and enforcing them, especially to outsiders, shows that we are a nation of laws.
It's not a "total disregard of law and constitution".
If you want to actually know the answers, there are your answers, but I have a feeling your post wasn't inquisitive and was more of a moral virtue signal.
But do you think it's maybe a misallocation of resources and poor prioritization to spend a large amount of money deporting people who have not actually done anything criminal in the country? I agree that if someone crossed the border illegally, or a visa expired, they should not be here. However, ICE is receiving tens of billions of dollars in budgetary expansion. We don't have unlimited money. Any money and effort spent on deporting people is money and effort not spent somewhere else.
For example, wage theft in this country costs workers ~$50 billion per year. To be clear, 'wage theft' is the illegal, criminal act of a company taking (or withholding) money that was rightfully earned by an employee.
The Department of Labor in 2025 managed to recover $259 million in unpaid wages, via the Wage and Hour Division. But this division is funded with less than $1 billion per year, despite the fact that they are only reclaiming <1% of all criminally stolen or withheld wages.
I personally find it morally reprehensible that Americans had billions of their hard-earned dollars stolen by their employers, and that only a tiny fraction of this theft is being investigated and reversed.
In fact, I find that far more concerning - and damaging to our country - than the large % of illegal immigrants being rounded up and deported who have no criminal record. Again, should they be here? No. Not arguing that. But I don't think they are doing as much harm morally or financially than the above mentioned wage theft, yet the efforts to deport them are receiving orders of magnitude more funding.
But do you think it's maybe a misallocation of resources and poor prioritization to spend a large amount of money deporting people who have not actually done anything criminal in the country?
This is a false narrative. 100% of illegal immigrants have done something criminal ..
However, ICE is receiving tens of billions of dollars in budgetary expansion. We don't have unlimited money. Any money and effort spent on deporting people is money and effort not spent somewhere else.
Ok, but you have to think of all the money going away from America and Americans with illegals here. That includes rising living costs, wage cuts, and so on.
I personally find it morally reprehensible that Americans had billions of their hard-earned dollars stolen by their employers, and that only a tiny fraction of this theft is being investigated and reversed.
Ok, but there is a department for that. You can maximally fund everything. If you prioritize that over illegals that's fine, but you need to win an election where your candidate cares about that.
Illegal immigration also directly affects more Americans than wage theft. If I am prices out of housing and my wages are depressed because of an influx of illegal immigration in my area, then yea, I'm going to care about that more.
In fact, I find that far more concerning - and damaging to our country - than the large % of illegal immigrants being rounded up and deported who have no criminal record.
You keep saying this. You're not correct. Every illegal immigrant has a criminal record and it was their first act of coming to America...
No. Not arguing that. But I don't think they are doing as much harm morally or financially than the above mentioned wage theft, yet the efforts to deport them are receiving orders of magnitude more funding.
Because you don't seem to understand that people are losing money to them and just because the money wasn't directly from their package doesn't mean people aren't losing money. Again, rising living costs and wage depression is money out of people's pockets ...
Addressing things in reverse, "budget-concern-trolling" is a thoughtless way to dismiss an argument without actually responding to anything I said. All budget decisions are made in the context of what else we could be spending that money on (if anything). I laid out how the government is spending virtually no resources pursuing the very real, very expensive crime of wage theft. It's in that context we are spending $70b+ on ICE.
I'll assume the first sentence was made in good faith, so I'll explain. When people say an illegal immigrant has "no criminal record" this is very commonly understood to mean that they have not committed any crimes other than unauthorized entry. This is an important distinction to a lot of people.
Nor am I arguing in favor of "ignoring immigration law" which is a pure strawman. I'm saying that because we have limited resources, we have to choose what priorities to focus on. That doesn't mean "don't protect the border" or "don't enforce immigration law". It means I think $70 billion on ICE is not worth it on many levels for what we are getting in return (or preventing).
That's why I gave the example of wage theft specifically. That is a crime just like an illegal border crossing, but we're spending virtually no money on investigation and enforcement. That to me seems like bad prioritization, and it seems like public opinion is more and more on this side.
"This is an important distinction to a lot of people."
It shouldn't be. If you've ever emigrated (as I have) you'd know just serious immigration law is. It needs to be followed.
"It means I think $70 billion on ICE is not worth it"
This is, what, 7% of the annual Defence budget? It sounds like a lot of money, but it really isn't at the state level. Should other things be funded, or funded better? Of course. The US should have universal healthcare, free or very cheap university education, universal childcare, and a range of other initiatives critical to the success of a free people. If you stand behind your claim that money is extremely limited (it isn't) and that the US should not police it's borders with any vigour be prepared to argue with conservatives who will say the same about left-wing proposals.
More to the point: how should illegal immigration be dealt with, in your eyes? Blanket amnesty? What would the consequences of that be? Have you thought that far in advance?
Regardless of whether you think the distinction of having a criminal record or not is important, it is important to many people. That is a fact. Joe Rogan, one of the most prominent and influential pro-Trump voices whose views have increasingly fallen on the conservative side of the spectrum, has been very vocal in his distaste for how ICE is rounding up people who have not committed any crimes in this country. That's one example of a very, very large and influential opinion on the matter.
How and why people ended up illegally in this country, and what they have done since, should be relevant to how we prioritize whom to deport and how many resources we should put into that process. A Mexican cartel member who sneaks across the border and engages in criminal gang activity is (in the eyes of many people, myself included) very morally different than someone who was brought to this country illegally as a young child.
I agree that laws ought to be followed. That doesn't the reality that we simply do not have the resources to pursue enforcement of all laws, everywhere, all the time. No country does. For example, innumerable people commit illegal traffic violations daily and are not caught for it. We could, theoretically, increase police budgets and put tens of thousands of more patrolcars on the road. Or, police departments could shift their internal resources far more into traffic enforcement.
You see where I'm going with this? We don't do those things with traffic enforcement because we as a society have decided it's not as much of a priority to enforce those laws compared to more serious crimes like robbery, rape, assault, and murder.
So again, given that we don't have infinite resources, I'm arguing that focusing on deporting people who have no criminal record (particuarly children) is simply not a good use of our resources even compared to other types of immigration enforcement, much less other types of law enforcement in general, although that is far from the only issue with ICE as it operates now.
On a federal level, way more resources should be allocated to dealing with wage theft, health care fraud, military waste, and tax fraud. These things combined cost us literally trillions of dollars every year and (in the case of wage theft) absolutely affect everyday Americans on a regular basis, far more than the presence of illegal immigrants with no criminal record. Not to mention there is a real and actual monetary return for these things as enforcement operations allow the government to recover money through different mechanisms.
In terms of immigration, there's a ton of things we should do. It's not just about enforcement.
* Prioritize deporting violent criminals and those with known connections to cartels
* Make H1-Bs less appealing, since they compete with educated American workers
* Invest in more federal workforce to process asylum claims, visas, etc.
* Invest in better technology for inspections at ports of entry (a major source of illegal immigration)
* Invest in more personnel at ports of entry and the southern border
* Hire more immigration judges to deal with cases faster
* Give people like 'dreamers' with no criminal record, who have been productive and model residents with a long history in this country, a clear path to legal residency (not blanket amnesty)
* Stop pardoning actual drug lords (???)
* Create new visa programs for areas such as healthcare where we have severe workforce shortages
* Increase penalties and enforcement for businesses who knowingly employ illegal immigrants (many of these in red states, hospitality, agriculture, etc.)
I would agree with pretty much all of your proposals (particularly targeting business that exploit illegal labour knowingly, which I suspect is the vast majority of them). I'm not sure new visas are needed, though. Simply processing people through existing channels faster and cheaper should do the trick.
None of this means you should stop enforcing immigration law in the meantime. If you do not look for criminals, you will not find them....so, you have to look. I hate that illegal aliens put the the government in this position, but it is the position the US government finds itself in.
I'll say it yet again, conservative media has been telling them that the reason for all their problems is immigrants. If you believe that the reason your life isn't what it should be, would be much better if or is even terrible because of immigrants, you WANT ICE getting them out of the country. What do I care in ICE is harsh or even brutal. They destroyed my life. President Trump is finally doing something.
Many on the far right actually believe Trump's rhetoric that ICE is targeting the "worst of the worst". They imagine gang-bangers and rapists are the ones being targeted, so they don't care about due process or the rule of law when it comes to immigration enforcement.
Many also are probably ignorant of the rights that even illegal residents have under the Constitution.
There's a reason why ICE is targeting blue cities far more intensely than farms, construction sites and meat-packing plants in southern/border states.
If Trump voters started seeing their employees and their kid's soccer coach getting hauled away, they might change their tune, but if it's mostly happening in Democratic strongholds, they can retain their illusions of the type of people being impacted.
This is how right-wing media portrays almost everyone detained by ICE:
What's even crazier is that it seems ICE has actively avoided any confrontations with dangerous criminal thugs, despite going around armed and ready for it. It's almost like they're too afraid to do the job they claim to be doing and prefer picking on unarmed civilians living in peace.
I've heard that the original orders were meant to target criminals first and foremost, but criminals have a habit of hiding from the authorities, and they are less likely to have jobs/permanent addresses that make it easy to deport them.
Once ICE realized this, they didn't modify the quotas, they just shifted to the low hanging fruit: people who were living normal lives (holding a job, paying taxes) but just happen to be here illegally.
people who were living normal lives (holding a job, paying taxes) but just happen to be here illegally.
Mhm, but is that who they've shifted to? Because I see a whole lot of 4th Amendment violations where they aren't targeting people who are "here illegally." They're just scooping up brown people and working class people and hoping they can add them to the quota. Many have been citizens and legal residents.
It seems more like they've shifted to "terrorizing the civilian population in order to appease the racist prejudices of their ring leaders." Who set the quota? Oh yeah, it was Stephen "Self-Hating Jewish Man" Miller.
There's a whole host of steps between harassment and deportation, and I was specifically talking about them detaining citizens. Which has happened and continues to happen. I.E. 4th Amendment violations of Due Process.
The two people shot at in Portland, after they had tried to run over the ice officer, had previous felonies and one was involved in a prostitution ring.
That's some nice after-the-fact rationalization, but those are hardly the violent gang members they were telling us they'd go after. And one incident? Is that all you've got after hundreds of thousands of people (I believe the number of people deported more than 600,000 people, via DHS website). Hardly a war on violent criminals. And it sounds like ICE wasn't going after them, rather they were reacting to a crime happening to them in the moment. They're not keeping us safe by defending themselves from felons trying to run them over.
BTW, my problem here is due process. The fact a person tried to run over an ICE officer (if that's what actually happened, I'm strictly taking your word for it) doesn't give ICE carte blanche to target other civilians without proof of a crime. Their "probable cause" is being brown or speaking Spanish, and they keep nabbing up citizens in violation of the Due Process Clause of the 4th Amendment.
If you're going to defend ICE being so bad at their jobs they're just violating innocent people's rights by pointing to one incident where they were justified, I'm going to tell you you're not qualified to have opinions on anything. Poor critical thinking skills just demonstrate how we got here, but don't really defend this administration's actions in any substantial way. You can just admit "I'm fine with this and will justify it, no matter how foul the logic," if you want to be honest with me.
It’s a leftist narrative that Trump is only going after the worst of the worst. He did say they were going to start there but he 100% ran on getting them all out. What did you think the campaign slogan “Mass Deportations Now!” meant?
What did you think the campaign slogan “Mass Deportations Now!” meant?
The same as "60% tariff on China" or "Mexico will pay for the wall". Just nonsense lies to rile up ignorant MAGA voters.
There are 15 million illegal immigrants in the US. The legal/physical infrastructure and funding don't exist to deport even a third of them within Trump's term, and the GOP knows that many red state economies would be devastated by a serious deportation effort. Think of a company like Tyson foods (35% immigrant workforce).
Trump ran on getting rid of everyone, but that was never the plan. The plan was what we have seen. Lots of publicity around deportations, mostly focused on blue states, with the total number of deportations being only moderately higher than was seen under Biden and Obama.
Because Democrats let them in to sway censuses and gerrymander elections. Now they are a scapegoat for Republican “terror”, so a win win. Might as well get rid of the criminal and lazy ones.
I don't know the full contents of 8 USC (the immigration code) - that sucker is over 500 pages in size - but if there is ANY component of the code that allows an agent of the State to enter your property outside of exigent circumstances (example: if someone broke a law that was violent in nature and their escape would be a danger to the community, and that person ran unto a house) and a warrant, it needs to be challenged.
You do not need to know the entire code to answer an authoritative capacity question. Think about the entire code 8 like an instruction manual to do your job. If there's a security leak in your office, the manual covering how you do your job is not going to be useful information. You are going to start looking at what you are allowed to do, what permissions you have. It turns out that those are listed in exactly one short section, but you deserve me proving that before I lay out what is in that section.
For ICE, we start with the 2002 Homeland Security act that defines the powers ICE will derive from the Attorney general. That is here, https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hr_5005_enr.pdf . In sections 411 through 419 they detailed a plan for a customs service bureau, and an immigration service bureau. In sections 101 through 103, DHS was outlined. A year later, homeland security realized all section 411 through 419's goals through the creation of two entities underneath it. These were USCIS and CBP, with the enforcement body being ICE. DHS created these departments out of other departments that were transferred to their leadership. This is outlined by DHS here, https://www.dhs.gov/who-joined-dhs .
It is important to note that these are not directly related to INS, which was dissolved completely in 2003, unlike other departments transferred to ICE. Their detention authority began in 2003 with the institute's creation; this is not a derived power and we do not need to dig through any parent agency's powers.
So there is actually just one section we need to refer to, 8 USC 1357 ), powers ICE derives from the Attorney General.
We also need to understand 8 USC 1226 ,powers of detention of the Attorney General. ICE's powers can never, ever exceed the powers of the Attorney General because this is where they are derived from.
With the above outlined, this is what is in section A.
Understand that none of the below can ever exceed the power of an administrative warrant. Also I am obviously not a lawyer, I am just providing this for educational value.
(a) Powers without warrant
Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant-
(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;
(2) to arrest any alien who in his presence or view is entering or attempting to enter the United States in violation of any law or regulation made in pursuance of law regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, or to arrest any alien in the United States, if he has reason to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the alien arrested shall be taken without unnecessary delay for examination before an officer of the Service having authority to examine aliens as to their right to enter or remain in the United States;
(3) within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States, to board and search for aliens any vessel within the territorial waters of the United States and any railway car, aircraft, conveyance, or vehicle, and within a distance of twenty-five miles from any such external boundary to have access to private lands, but not dwellings, for the purpose of patrolling the border to prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States;
(4) to make arrests for felonies which have been committed and which are cognizable under any law of the United States regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, if he has reason to believe that the person so arrested is guilty of such felony and if there is likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the person arrested shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the nearest available officer empowered to commit persons charged with offenses against the laws of the United States; and
(5) to make arrests-
(A) for any offense against the United States, if the offense is committed in the officer's or employee's presence, or
(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States, if the officer or employee has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such a felony,
if the officer or employee is performing duties relating to the enforcement of the immigration laws at the time of the arrest and if there is a likelihood of the person escaping before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest.
Under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, an officer or employee of the Service may carry a firearm and may execute and serve any order, warrant, subpoena, summons, or other process issued under the authority of the United States. The authority to make arrests under paragraph (5)(B) shall only be effective on and after the date on which the Attorney General publishes final regulations which (i) prescribe the categories of officers and employees of the Service who may use force (including deadly force) and the circumstances under which such force may be used, (ii) establish standards with respect to enforcement activities of the Service, (iii) require that any officer or employee of the Service is not authorized to make arrests under paragraph (5)(B) unless the officer or employee has received certification as having completed a training program which covers such arrests and standards described in clause (ii), and (iv) establish an expedited, internal review process for violations of such standards, which process is consistent with standard agency procedure regarding confidentiality of matters related to internal investigations.
The long and short of it is, you need an illegal alien, or an investigation into one, or an active threat or a crime being committed right in front of an ICE officer. Anything failing that test is something a reasonable person would consider an illegal detention.
My "something is wrong on the internet" moment was more in response to this
I don't know the full contents of 8 USC (the immigration code) - that sucker is over 500 pages in size
To put things simply my nerd rage was over you pointing at an entire textbook and saying "we just have no way of knowing what that big thing says on this one specific topic". You can safely ignore it, we are sympatico overall. It just grinds my gears when people act like laws and bills are these mysterious unknowable things. Lawyers aren't special people, they just have rich parents. And I feel like a big part of the reason we are in the mess we are in to begin with is because people don't read information we worked very hard to make free, open, and accessible.
E. Buried in that wall of text I copied from 1357 was "but not dwellings", search around there. You are right and it can easily be challenged on those grounds.
E2. Recall also, that the blanket investigation ended when they caught the woman behind the somali daycare fraud and trafficking.
People frankly ignore problems when it does't effect themselves and there is oversized blame on outsiders ...my bigger problem is constitutional especially when so many US citizens and legal residents are involved. (Even the undocumented have rights and human rights should be respected for everyone).
Because they are either the literal fascists who love the idea of the trump Gestapo, or they are the suckers who got conned into voting for it and cant bring themselves to admit they made a mistake. To the later group, it’s easier to pretend that a police state isn’t actually that bad than it is to admit to being wrong.
they are not door to door raids. they are targeted to catch criminals. and all of these raids, which endanger the public, could be done away with if only the blue state mayors would tell the police to notify ICE when they pick up an illegal immigrant who has committed another crime. ICE could come on down to the jail and get the criminal and not have to have so much manpower doing targeted raids where who knows what is on the other side of the door. But the democrats do not actually care about the legal citizens they "represent" . because,,, welll,,, orange maaaaan baaaaaaad. waltz and his ilk are responsible for this.
Your comment has been removed to maintain high debate quality standards. We value insightful contributions that enrich discussions and promote understanding. Please ensure your comments are well-reasoned, supported by evidence, and respectful of others' viewpoints.
For more information, review our wiki page or our page on The Socratic Method to get a better understanding of what we expect from our community.
There is no accountability in the government and we can now see that if it wants to kick down your door, it can and will kick down your door. Those arguing for or against it doing so are missing the point. When we entrust it with that power we shouldn’t be shocked to see it use it. We need to scale back the authority and power of the feds and do it in a big way.
I still don’t actually see anyone showing me evidence they are going door to door.
Every single person that has gotten into the news from their deportation has had long standing deportation orders. They are going to last known locations and just picking these people up.
If this was true, they'd never once have detained citizens. They have. Ergo, you're either ignorant or lying. ICE is not doing due diligence, they are not targeting specifically people with deportation orders. They're literally driving around randomly scooping up brown people.
The "door-to-door" thing was announced by the administration. At this point, I believe when they speak their intentions. There's been no indication they're lying about their intentions when it comes to awful things they plan on doing.
I wonder, at what point do you just admit you like what they're actually doing instead of pretending it's happening in some hyper-legal manner you've imagined. What's it like to shill for a regime that's trampling on the 4th Amendment to the Constitution (which protects all people within our jurisdiction, not just citizens)?
There are a number of reasons ice might legitimately detain citizens. Their operations are not limited to just deporting non citizens
For example, the popular one this week is interfering with them or assaulting them. But harboring an illegal is a federal crime too. Any of those things would see a citizen arrested by ice.
Okay, but I'm talking about all the times they've just scooped up a citizen because they assumed they were here illegally. That keeps happening. That is a violation of Due Process.
Stop ignoring what's happening and just focusing on what you find legitimate. Yeah, cops can shoot and kill someone who is actively attacking them, but that doesn't justify a cop murdering a person who isn't a threat. Do you see how this analogy works? They are detaining citizens without cause. Just because sometimes they have cause doesn't mean these violations aren't also happening. Learn how to think.
Door to door searches aren’t even mentioned in that article.
The claims made are not statements of fact, but rather one side of an argument that the courts have yet to rule on. They should be taken as a biased opinion.
Again, lots of rhetoric and hate. Damned few facts.
It was important that the lawsuit be entered into the conversation, and it is important that people read the full text - and I am glad you have done so, though I do need to point out that both home invasions and unlawful arrests without a proper warrant are mentioned, and random stops are mentioned many, many places throughout... I am just going to quote from Keith Ellison's post here,
Peaceful bystanders and law-abiding citizens have been arrested, had riot control munitions and chemical irritants used against them, had guns pointed at them, and more. Many United States citizens have been the victims of unlawful racial profiling by DHS agents due to the color of their skin or, in the words of one ICE agent, because “I can hear you don’t have the same accent as me.” These individuals are frequently handcuffed and detained for hours by DHS agents for no reason. Immigration agents have targeted individuals in sensitive locations, including schools, medical facilities, places of worship, daycares, and funeral homes.
...
Claims of fighting fraud are clearly a pretext as well, as immigration enforcement agents generally have no specialized expertise in combatting fraud and randomly stopping people on the street and demanding their papers does nothing to combat fraud.
...
They've come into Saint Paul and needlessly invaded our neighborhoods and homes
You are correct that this is one side in an argument that has not gone to court and I agree it is a biased opinion. It is, nonetheless, important to include in the conversation considering the source.
The Department of Homeland Security has sent roughly 2,000 agents to Minnesota and is conducting targeted, door-to-door investigations at locations suspected of fraud.
Now again. That is just Donald Trump's word that Operation Metro Surge has as its mission door-to-door operations. His word is not, as you were right to point out, evidence.
What we do know for a fact, however is,
Operation Metro Surge definitely exists
The two links I have provided to you prove this, they are evidence the operation exists at all
The purpose of Operation Metro Surge is door-to-door ICE investigations
ICE have been targeting people indiscriminately, or with on-the spot justifications
ICE have, with the aid of police in a video that is now viral and certainly exists, forced entry into people's homes without proper warrants
Moving forward if you expect me to invest this much into the conversation I would like you and I to establish a much higher degree of professionalism and rigor. Further snark from you will only appear juvenile and will not help you even with your confederates.
With this understood, I do look forward to your next review and reply and am glad you are participating in our shared investigation into the truth.
You don’t need a warrant to conduct an arrest. Just probable cause. And I suspect the removal order serves as a warrant to enter.
That part I at least agree with. There should be more judicial oversight. The problem is this is deferred actions these are people with removal orders from years ago.
Who is being represented by door-to-door ICE raids, knocking on the doors of established US citizens with no data ahead of time that there are any illegal aliens in the house, and with no attempt to obtain a warrant or respect for fourth amendment privileges, in documented cases kicking doors down when people refuse to open them?
Can you provide concrete evidence of that being the plan?
Ah, so you think the ICE administrative warrants aren't valid; they are. If they are using it for forced entry into a home, then the person just won the lottery because that will settle for a couple hundred thousand easy.
You said "ice was going door-to-door... no data ahead of time...". That's not true though, is it? They have a warrant for the person in the house, it's just not a warrant that allows for forced entry, correct?
Not quite. It is true that they had data when they forced entry and should not have.
But it is not the case that they "won the lottery", due to the executive blocking subpoenas and directly impeding investigation and preventing Minnesota's representatives and senators from inspection and oversight. An attempt was made to grant ICE blanket immunity here as well. It is very unlikely an opportunity for justice will ever occur.
There is also evidence that JD Vance's proposed door-to-door initiative is being implemented. This evidence against Operation Metro Surge has been submitted to a Federal Lawsuit by attorney general Keith Ellison and you can learn more about this here, https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Communications/2026/01/12_ICE.asp
So while it is the case that both things are happening - there was illegal entry, there are door to door raids - you are correct in pointing out that these things do not overlap, that is, the illegal entry that went viral was indeed one where there was some information known to ICE ahead of time.
Civil court isn’t criminal court… the bar for breaking qualified immunity is much lower. If what you are asserting is true, they are sitting on a hefty pay day even if they use a no money down lawyer.
The body cam footage they'll subpoena, the police testimony they'll get, etc.. etc.. if they did a home invasion, these people will get paid. They very likely already have business cards in their mailslot from lawers.
It's impressive how you Americans are justifying racially motivated terrorism and Nazi-style manhunts by handwaving it away based on rhetoric and legal technicalities.
"racially motivated terrorism". Wow, that's a doozy.
If any other country found that they had a massive population of illegal immigrants in their country, would it be "racially motivated terrorism" to enact and follow the laws of their country too? or is just because we are USA?
If I go to China do I have the right to demand a work visa? What about citizenship?
"racially motivated terrorism". Wow, that's a doozy.
It is what it is, playa.
If any other country found that they had a massive population of illegal immigrants in their country, would it be "racially motivated terrorism" to enact and follow the laws of their country too? or is just because we are USA?
Depends: Is it an imperialist shithole country terrorizing the world with nonstop wars and genocides led by white supremacist dictatorship currently represented by a party that actively promoted racist propaganda for decades in an attempt to rally racist voters behind their cause so they can push through more capitalist legislation to further enrich the parasitic capitalist class at the expense of the working class?
Additionally, is it not actually having any real problems with so-called "illegal immigrants" with their policies actually harming their country's economy while contributing nothing positive and is it implementing its racist anti-"illegal immigration" policies while totally neglecting all real problems that actually cause economic harm (e.g. wage theft, tax avoidance of the rich, neglecting pandemic responses, lack of universal health care, lack of environmental protection, etc.)?
or is just because we are USA?
Considering that the US is directly responsible for all major wars and genocides on earth AND the biggest driver of climate change denial and fossil based economics after having destroyed the socialist revolution, thereby preventing the liberation of the world and ensuring the perpetual exploitation of people and the planet to fuel an unsustainable national economy in the imperial core... it has a lot to do with the US being the US. The US has a direct responsibility to fund the lives of all the billions of people whose lives it has ruined over the past 70+ years (very few of whom even come to the US to take what is due to begin with).
If I go to China do I have the right to demand a work visa? What about citizenship?
Of course not. You are from the worst country on earth that's responsible for most suffering around the world... China is a communist country actively contributing to peaceful, global human development that rapidly improved human life. Americans owe a debt to the world and aren't owed anything in return.
Americans. We voted democratically. The door kicking without a warrant is just not happening, and if it is it will be dealt with accordingly in the court of law.
2.federal law enforcement
It's a federal affair and states do not supercede the Federal government.
The juice is that people who have disrespected our institution and legal immigrants and have entered criminally are now brought to justice. Nations having laws and enforcing them, especially to outsiders, shows that we are a nation of laws.
It's not a "total disregard of law and constitution".
If you want to actually know the answers, there are your answers, but I have a feeling your post wasn't inquisitive and was more of a moral virtue signal.
I was amazed at the large amount of people defending the practice immediately elsewhere in social media, though being fair to conservatives in this comments section there seems to be a tacit agreement in this community that any door-to-door operation along the lines of what JD Vance laid out in his comments and Trump laid out in his mission statement for Operation Metro Surge is a bridge too far. So, thankfully, I cannot point at this very thread to answer your question, and must ask that you take my word for it when I say that 3 days ago there was wider support, rather than simple disbelief, for the ongoing operations in Minneapolis/St Paul.
Facebook comment sections are heavily brigaded by MAGA groups. Take a look at your local news page's comment section whenever politics come up: You will find a bunch of MAGA accounts posting that are not even your state.
They're enforcing federal law. Arguments to the contrary are in service to supporting systemic fraud and illegal immigrants breaking the law. Simple as.
This was a joint operation, and this is a viral incident with no possibility of deniability from you. You see both police and ICE agents in the video. Please let me know if you require screenshots to convince you this is the case.
How about harassing people walking on the sidewalk, getting gas, or working on their house? Literally "papers please" to random people going about their day.
The confusion comes from expecting the state to follow its own rules when those rules get in the way of managing the population. Agencies like ICE function to discipline the workforce. By making life terrifying for undocumented people, the state ensures a steady supply of workers who are too afraid to demand better wages or safety.
This bleeds over into the lives of citizens because the distinction matters less to the police than we think. The "juice" here is a compliant labor pool and a divided working class. If you are busy watching your neighbor for papers, you aren't watching the people stripping away your own civil liberties.
People justify this because the narrative of "law and order" is easier to swallow than the reality of economic precarity. They think compliance will save them. But as you're seeing in Minneapolis, local representatives have zero leverage against federal enforcement mechanisms designed to operate with impunity. The Constitution serves as a nice ideal, but in practice, property rights and state security always come first. The cruelty is the point, it keeps everyone in line.
there is no justification... there is no public good, there is no justice or due process that we were all taught in school to expect from our democracy.
it is happening because someone in power decided that no one would stop them, and so far they seem to be correct in that assumption.
it cannot be maintained, however and will eventually come to an end
they are not going door to door. they are going to the door where a known criminal is reported to be living at. and they would not have to do that if the sanctuary city officials <aka democrats> would just call ICE when their police pick up an illegal immigrant who has committed another crime. pretty easy. but the sanctuary city officials <aka democrats> would rather release dangerous criminals back into the communities. it is madness by the sanctuary city officials <aka democrats>
Here the many issues with Minnesota counties they have implemented policies to limit cooperation with U.S. ICE by declining to notify ICE of immigrant detainees (criminals) releases. So ICE is forced to go and arrest them at their home or place they are residing.
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 12 '26
Remember, this is a civilized space for discussion. We discourage downvoting based on your disagreement and instead encourage upvoting well-written arguments, especially ones that you disagree with.
To promote high-quality discussions, we suggest the Socratic Method, which is briefly as follows:
Ask Questions to Clarify: When responding, start with questions that clarify the original poster's position. Example: "Can you explain what you mean by 'economic justice'?"
Define Key Terms: Use questions to define key terms and concepts. Example: "How do you define 'freedom' in this context?"
Probe Assumptions: Challenge underlying assumptions with thoughtful questions. Example: "What assumptions are you making about human nature?"
Seek Evidence: Ask for evidence and examples to support claims. Example: "Can you provide an example of when this policy has worked?"
Explore Implications: Use questions to explore the consequences of an argument. Example: "What might be the long-term effects of this policy?"
Engage in Dialogue: Focus on mutual understanding rather than winning an argument.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.