ICE takes boy with snacks off sidewalk
Executive summary
A five-year-old Columbia Heights student, identified in school-released photos as Liam Conejo Ramos, was detained alongside his father by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Minnesota and later moved to a family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, a sequence the school district and the family’s lawyer say has been part of a wider enforcement surge that detained four students in the district [1] [2] [3]. Federal officials say the child was not targeted and that an adult fled the scene, leaving the child behind, while school and local leaders allege officers refused offers to place the child with a safe adult and that the boy was effectively used as “bait” to draw out relatives [4] [5] [3].
1. What the reporting documents: a child detained outside his home
Multiple news outlets published a photograph and accounts showing ICE officers standing next to a small boy outside a Columbia Heights home after the child returned from preschool; school officials, the district and the family’s lawyer say the boy and his father were taken and transferred to a Texas detention center [6] [5] [1]. Columbia Heights Public Schools superintendent Zena Stenvik has said four students—two 17-year-olds, a 10-year-old and the five-year-old—have been detained in the recent operations, a claim repeated across local and national reporting [1] [2].
2. ICE and DHS version: not targeting a child, an operation to arrest the parent
The Department of Homeland Security and ICE maintained the agency was conducting a targeted operation to arrest the child’s father and that the child was not the target; DHS said agents stayed with the child for his safety after the father fled on foot, characterizing the encounter as an arrest of an adult with the child left at the scene [4] [7]. DHS spokespeople have pointed to department policy about placing children with a safe person designated by a parent and framed the operation as law-enforcement action against an adult described as an undocumented immigrant from Ecuador [4] [7].
3. School and family account: refusal to release the child to other adults and claim of “bait”
School officials and the family’s attorney have said other adults on the scene offered to take custody of the child but were refused by agents, and they have accused ICE of using the boy as “bait” to lure other family members from the home—an allegation the family’s lawyer says is part of a pattern during the enforcement surge [3] [5] [2]. The lawyer, Marc Prokosch, and district officials have described the transfer of the father and child to Dilley, Texas, as traumatic for the family and the wider school community [1] [3].
4. Legal and moral contours: authority versus ethics
Legal analysts quoted in coverage say detaining a child in the context of a family enforcement action is likely within the government’s legal authority but emphasize that legality does not resolve moral and policy questions; local leaders and advocacy groups have argued the practice is inhumane and destabilizing for children and schools [4] [3]. DHS officials point to standard procedures for family custody during arrests, but critics note the optics and community fear when masked, armed officers remove young students from neighborhoods and homes [4] [8].
5. The specific phrasing “took boy with snacks off sidewalk”: what the reporting supports and what it does not
None of the reviewed reports document or describe the child carrying snacks on a sidewalk as part of the incident; published accounts focus on a photo of the child with a backpack and hat outside the home after preschool and on competing accounts over whether the child was “abandoned” by an adult or held by agents for safety [6] [7] [4]. Therefore, the precise image of ICE “taking a boy with snacks off a sidewalk” is not supported by the provided reporting, and that specific detail cannot be confirmed from the sources at hand [6] [7].
6. Political reaction, public outcry and fundraising response
The image and accounts provoked broad outrage, prompted commentary from political figures including Vice President J.D. Vance and Minnesota officials, and sparked fundraising efforts for the family that raised six-figure sums according to press coverage; commentators have debated whether the episode reflects necessary enforcement or a morally fraught use of power [9] [10] [6]. Media coverage has also questioned government descriptions—some outlets relayed DHS claims the child was abandoned, while school officials and witnesses dispute that narrative, illustrating how competing accounts drive public debate [4] [5].
7. What remains unsettled and what to watch next
Key unresolved facts include precise on-scene exchanges—who offered to take custody, who refused, and the timeline between the initial encounter and the family’s transfer to Texas—details that local officials, ICE statements and the family lawyer currently contest in ways that reporters relay but do not definitively reconcile [5] [4] [1]. Future reporting that produces body-cam footage, ICE operational reports, or clearer agency documentation would be necessary to conclusively settle disputed claims; until then, the incident remains a flashpoint where legal authority, on-the-ground practice and community standards collide [4] [3].