ICE Agents Can Now Enter Homes With Administrative Warrants, Memo Reveals

by Chief Editor

A recently disclosed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo, dated May 12, 2025, details a change in policy regarding home entries during immigration arrests. According to a complaint filed by the whistleblower group Whistleblower Aid, the memo authorizes ICE agents to enter the homes of individuals suspected of being in the U.S. illegally using an administrative warrant – a warrant issued by DHS officials, often ICE agents themselves – rather than a warrant signed by a judge.

New Guidance on Home Entry

Traditionally, ICE agents have been required to obtain a warrant signed by a judge before entering a private residence to make an arrest. The new guidance, as outlined in the memo, suggests that administrative warrants, also known as Form I-205, are now sufficient for this purpose. The DHS Office of General Counsel has reportedly determined that the U.S. Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and existing regulations do not prohibit the use of these administrative warrants.

Did You Know? The May 12, 2025 memo was signed by Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and, according to the whistleblower complaint, was initially shared with a limited number of DHS officials.

The memo states that agents must ensure the Form I-205 is properly completed and supported by a final order of removal issued by an immigration judge, the Board of Immigration Appeals, a U.S. district court, or a magistrate judge. Agents are also instructed to “knock and announce” their presence before entering a residence and to use “only a necessary and reasonable amount of force” if admittance is refused.

Concerns Raised Over Fourth Amendment Rights

Whistleblower Aid argues that the policy change violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The group contends that administrative warrants do not meet the standard of being issued by a “neutral and detached magistrate.” Senator Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., echoed these concerns, calling the policy “legally and morally abhorrent” and a potential violation of Americans’ rights.

Expert Insight: The shift towards relying on administrative warrants for home entries represents a significant change in ICE enforcement tactics. While DHS maintains the legality of this approach, the reliance on warrants issued internally raises questions about due process and the potential for overreach. The limited distribution of the memo itself suggests a deliberate effort to minimize scrutiny.

DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin stated that individuals served with these warrants have already undergone full due process and have a final order of removal from an immigration judge. She also asserted that officers issuing the warrants have established probable cause, and that the use of administrative warrants has historical and legal precedent.

What Could Happen Next

The disclosure of this memo is likely to intensify the ongoing debate over immigration enforcement policies. It is possible that Congress will launch an investigation into the matter, as requested by Senator Blumenthal. Legal challenges to the policy are also anticipated, potentially leading to court rulings that could clarify the legality of using administrative warrants for home entries. Depending on the outcome of these challenges, ICE could be forced to revert to its previous practice of requiring warrants signed by a judge, or the policy could remain in effect, expanding the scope of ICE’s enforcement powers.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an administrative warrant?

An administrative warrant, or Form I-205, is a warrant issued by officials within the Department of Homeland Security – often ICE agents themselves – rather than a warrant signed by a judge, according to the whistleblower complaint.

What does the memo say about the use of force?

The memo states that if ICE agents are refused admittance to a residence while attempting to serve an administrative warrant, they are authorized to use “only a necessary and reasonable amount of force to enter the alien’s residence.”

Who is raising concerns about this policy change?

The whistleblower group Whistleblower Aid, representing two anonymous U.S. government officials, argues the policy violates the Fourth Amendment. Senator Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., has also called for an investigation, stating the policy is “legally and morally abhorrent.”

As this policy unfolds, how might the balance between national security and individual rights be redefined in the context of immigration enforcement?

You may also like

Leave a Comment