Is ICE Conducting "Roving Patrols?"

[WorldWatcher]

Yes, to belabour a point not in dispute.


ICE legal team disagrees. sorry for the redneck screenshot:

View attachment 1215218

I am sure that you disagree with ICE Legal counsel which is fine. But do you have a court case to back up your disagreement?

DHS saying DHS doesn't need Judicial Warrants to enter and search a home or business owned by anotgher PRIOR to detainment.

Shocked I tell you.

Have you read Abel v. U.S. (1960)?

Ya. Two things as to why the case doesn't apply.

#1 The initial search was POST detainment at the hotel.

#2 The INS agents allow him to take possessions/papers and check out of the hotel. The FBI returned later and searched the room again with the permission of the owner (hotel management) which is when they found the microfilm and evidence in the wastebasket. The property had been "abandoned" because he was allowed to check out, and the search was conducted with permission.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

DHS saying DHS doesn't need Judicial Warrants to enter and search a home or business owned by anotgher PRIOR to detainment.

Shocked I tell you.

So you consider the source just as I do.

Ya. Two things as to why the case doesn't apply.

#1 The initial search was POST detainment at the hotel.

#2 The INS agents allow him to take possessions/papers and check out of the hotel. The FBI returned later and searched the room again with the permission of the owner (hotel management) which is when they found the microfilm and evidence in the wastebasket. The property had been "abandoned" because he was allowed to check out, and the search was conducted with permission.

WW

Fair enough.But is there a case to say that an administrative warrant is not valid?

 

[Rawley]

They have "administrative warrants" issued by DHS employees. Those allow DHS Agents to detain the subject of the warrant.

That is different than a judicial warrant which allows DHS Agents to enter and search a home, vehicle, business, etc. Such searches have to be based on propable cause and issued via an Article III Judge, not an administrative employee.

So just using the term "warrant" lacks clarity.

WW
.
.
Amendment the 4th – Search and Seizure

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.

And where's the part where the warrant has to be issued by a judicial employee?

 

[WorldWatcher]

So you consider the source just as I do.

Fair enough.But is there a case to say that an administrative warrant is not valid?

I've been trying to get back into Court listener. I've tried two different browsers but the page won't load to search.

But the case is Gibson v. Bondi (January 17, 2026) where a Federal just issued an order where administrative warrants were not a constitutional basis for entry and search, that required a Judicial warrant by an Article III judge - not an administration employee. Detain fine. But not enter and search.

EDIT: Still can't get into a court listener, but here is the order. See section "C" regarding the Fourth Amendment.

WW

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/minnesota/mndce/0:2026cv00172/230248/6/

 

[mudwhistle]

I didn't know. Must be recent. Hope you like it there.

I moved over the holidays and got married again.

I'm still settling in.

 

[mudwhistle]

ICE is a piece of shit. Defund ICE.

 

[White 6]

I moved over the holidays and got married again.

I'm still settling in.

Congrats, Dude! I wish you two well out there! Watch out for tornado season. I hear it's even worse than here.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I've been trying to get back into Court listener. I've tried two different browsers but the page won't load to search.

But the case is Gibson v. Bondi (January 17, 2026) where a Federal just issued an order where administrative warrants were not a constitutional basis for entry and search, that required a Judicial warrant by an Article III judge - not an administration employee. Detain fine. But not enter and search.

EDIT: Still can't get into a court listener, but here is the order. See section "C" regarding the Fourth Amendment.

WW

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/minnesota/mndce/0:2026cv00172/230248/6/

I looked it up thanks.

It is as you say as far as the ruling.

The judge is a Biden-Walz man. We will see how the supreme court rules. my guess is that the doj will wait for one of these judges to release someone really foul, and take that case to the supremes.

For your side, it could be a classic case of "a bad case makes bad law."

 

[mudwhistle]

Congrats, Dude! I wish you two well out there! Watch out for tornado season. I hear it's even worse than here.

Thanks. I'm near Kansas City which is on the border of Missouri.
It's not so bad here. You need to go towards Topeka for it to be really bad.

 

[White 6]

Thanks. I'm near Kansas City which is on the border of Missouri.
It's not so bad here. You need to go towards Topeka for it to be really bad.

I liked Kansas City. I did a couple week there on a corporate project gig. Late winter or early spring. Only thing that bugged was a relentless stead wind for days.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

DHS saying DHS doesn't need Judicial Warrants to enter and search a home or business owned by anotgher PRIOR to detainment.

Shocked I tell you.



Ya. Two things as to why the case doesn't apply.

#1 The initial search was POST detainment at the hotel.

#2 The INS agents allow him to take possessions/papers and check out of the hotel. The FBI returned later and searched the room again with the permission of the owner (hotel management) which is when they found the microfilm and evidence in the wastebasket. The property had been "abandoned" because he was allowed to check out, and the search was conducted with permission.

WW

The INS has not existed for over 20 years. Once again, you are full of shit!

 

[WorldWatcher]

The INS has not existed for over 20 years. Once again, you are full of shit!

Maybe you should pay attention before claiming someone is full of shit.

Seymour asked me if I was familiar with Abel v. United States which is a SCOTUS case from 1960.

Last I checked that was over 20 years ago, more like 66.

WW

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Maybe you should pay attention before claiming someone is full of shit.

Seymour asked me if I was familiar with Abel v. United States which is a SCOTUS case from 1960.

Last I checked that was over 20 years ago, more like 66.

WW

Are you familiar with the term OBE? It is a term we used to signify that the situation has changed and was Overcome By Events. That is your normal state of being.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Are you familiar with the term OBE? It is a term we used to signify that the situation has changed and was Overcome By Events. That is your normal state of being.

When busted - insult.

Normal for you.

Bless your heart.

WW