ICE Orders Agents To Forcibly Enter Homes Without Judicial Warrants

In May 2025, an internal ICE memo reportedly authorized agents to rely on administrative removal documents known as an I-205, an administrative warrant, or a 'Warrant of Removal'.

“An Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press reveals that the agency allows officers to forcibly enter homes to make arrests without a judicial warrant”

AP News

The guidance allowed use of those documents to enter residences and arrest noncitizens without a judicial criminal warrant, and it permitted a 'reasonable' or 'necessary and reasonable' amount of force if occupants refused to open their door.

AP News

The memo is said to instruct officers to knock and announce first, identify themselves and their purpose, and to limit their actions to the target's residence while allowing an immediate look-around for officer safety.

Multiple reports attribute the memo to Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and say DHS lawyers or the Office of General Counsel cleared the guidance.

Critics, including Sen. Richard Blumenthal and whistleblower groups, say the guidance is a secret departure from past ICE practice that risks violating Fourth Amendment protections and DHS rules and that it was circulated selectively and taught verbally to recruits rather than documented.

Whistleblower Aid and others say ICE previously relied on judicial warrants to enter homes and that the new guidance may be prompting more warrantless home arrests and door-to-door operations.

CNN

Several reports say instructors and some officials objected to the policy, with at least one instructor resigning rather than teach recruits the new standard.

DHS and ICE officials and their supporters say administrative warrants and I-205s have a legal pedigree in immigration enforcement.

“A newly obtained internal ICE memo has clarified the conditions under which immigration officers can enter private homes to carry out arrests”

dallasexpress

Senior DHS figures assert that people served with such documents already have final removal orders, probable cause, and due process.

Sources reporting the administration's position cite internal legal reviews that conclude the Constitution and federal law do not prohibit relying on administrative warrants for these entries.

They also point to precedent and congressional recognition of administrative warrants in immigration contexts.

Reporting beyond legal debate highlights operational and human‑cost concerns, with critics warning the shift could increase wrongful home entries, raids on the wrong house, and door‑to‑door arrests.

Some reports include anecdotal incidents alleged to reflect a broader pattern.

Just The News

The New Republic cites reports of increased warrantless arrests and a disturbing incident where masked agents reportedly used a five‑year‑old as bait before detaining him and his father.

Media Matters points to the Wall Street Journal's account of an expansion of authority and attendant constitutional worries, and whistleblowers say many newly hired ICE agents lack law‑enforcement backgrounds and are being directed to rely on I‑205 forms, raising additional training and safety concerns.

Responses have included congressional demands for transparency, public criticism from lawmakers, and calls for more oversight.

“Now 29° Fri 37° Sat 34° byALEXX ALTMAN-DEVILBISS | The National News Desk (TNND) —Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reportedly told agents in an internal memo that they could forcibly enter the homes of people without a judicial warrant if they are subject to deportation”

kimatv

Sen. Blumenthal called the policy "shocking" and "legally and morally objectionable," and whistleblower groups have provided the memo to Congress.

kimatv

Coverage varies in tone: some outlets prominently foreground legal and human-rights concerns and whistleblower accounts, while others foreground the administration's legal review and defense.

The reporting collectively documents the memo, the contested legal reasoning, the alleged secrecy of its rollout, and the ongoing debate about constitutionality and enforcement practice.