The sanctity of the American home has become the latest flashpoint in an escalating constitutional crisis as federal immigration tactics face unprecedented legal scrutiny. A memo has reportedly authorised agents to bypass traditional judicial oversight, sparking a fierce debate over the limits of federal power and the endurance of the Fourth Amendment.
As reports of forced entries and warrantless raids surface in Minnesota, the administration has been forced to defend its ‘Metro Surge’ operations. Vice President JD Vance addresses the controversy on whether a standard administrative document carries the same legal weight as a warrant signed by a neutral judge.
Vance Defends Sweeping Power of Administrative Orders
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo authorising agents to enter homes by force leaked on Wednesday. It attracted intense scrutiny, with many questioning it because it was perceived as a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Vance addressed the issue in a roundtable discussion with local leaders and community members at Royalston Square in Minnesota on Thursday. He told the reporters that the ICE officers are ‘never going to enter somebody’s house without some kind of a warrant.’ That is, unless they are attacked and have to protect themselves.
One asked him whether the administrative warrant issued to ICE agents was sufficient or violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
‘Our understanding is that you can enforce the immigration laws of the country under an administrative order,’ Vance explained. ‘That’s what we think. That’s our understanding [of] the law. That’s our best faith, [an] attempt to understand the law. Again, this is something courts will weigh in on.’
He added that if the court said ‘no,’ then they would follow.
The Call for Hearing
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn, wrote an email to Kristi Noem, the US Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, on Wednesday after he heard from a whistleblower the secret ICE memo that reportedly allowed the agents to ‘ignore the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and enter homes without a judicial warrant in order to effectuate civil immigration arrests.’
In the letter, Blumenthal, who, per Forbes, called the memo ‘unlawful and morally repugnant,’ questioned the policy, noting that administrative warrants ‘do not rise to the level of a judicial warrant permitting entry into a home or its surrounding area as required under longstanding Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.’
Blumenthal wanted to know the number of individuals at DHS and component agencies who received the memo, or who have been trained on its contents and related legal justification. He also wanted copies of any separate memoranda distributed, if there were any.
Constitutional Clash Over Fourth Amendment Protections
Legal experts and civil rights advocates argue that the ICE memo directly contradicts decades of established legal precedent. The Fourth Amendment generally prohibits law enforcement from entering a home without a warrant signed by a judge, except in extreme emergencies.
The National Immigration Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina also state that administrative warrants do not hold enough authority for agents to enter homes without consent.
Judicial warrants involve judges and probable cause for authorities to search a home. In contrast, administrative warrants require only an agency official’s signature, making it easier for ICE agents to arrest and seize homes.
Meanwhile, Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin assured Forbes in an email that individuals served with an administrative warrant would receive a ‘full due process and a final order of removal from an immigration judge.’