Ice detain year old
Executive summary
A federal immigration enforcement operation in Columbia Heights, Minnesota, resulted in the detention of a five‑year‑old boy, Liam Conejo Ramos, and his father on January 20, 2026, prompting local outrage and national debate over ICE tactics and policies [1][2]. School and district officials say agents used the child to make contact with the home and then transported both child and parent to a Texas detention facility, while the Department of Homeland Security says agents did not target the child and that the father fled as officers approached [3][4][5].
1. What happened: a five‑year‑old taken during an enforcement sweep
Witnesses and Columbia Heights Public Schools officials reported that a preschooler wearing a Spider‑Man backpack was taken into custody alongside his father in their driveway after school, and photographs released by the district show the boy by an ICE vehicle; district leaders say the child was later sent to a Texas detention center with his father [1][6][7]. Local officials and the family’s lawyer contend that after the father was detained, agents asked the child to knock on the family’s door to determine whether others were inside — an action described by the superintendent as “using a 5‑year‑old as bait” [3][8].
2. The government’s version and stated policies
DHS and ICE officials have publicly defended the operation, saying the agency did not target a child but was conducting enforcement against the father and that agents remained with the child when the parent allegedly fled, consistent with DHS statements that children are placed with a safe person designated by a parent or otherwise cared for during arrests [5][9]. ICE officials have emphasized they enter homes only under limited legal circumstances and that they did not seek to break into dwellings in this instance, according to agency remarks reported by local outlets [10].
3. Scale and local context: this was not an isolated incident in the district
Columbia Heights officials say the five‑year‑old was the fourth student detained by immigration agents in recent weeks — including a 10‑year‑old and two 17‑year‑olds — and that agents have been observed around schools and buses, fueling community alarm and protests after a prior deadly ICE shooting in the region [2][4]. School leaders and local coverage describe a pattern of intensified enforcement in the Twin Cities suburbs that has torn families apart and spurred fundraising and political responses [7][9].
4. Legal and ethical flashpoints: children in immigration enforcement
The case crystallizes a longstanding legal and ethical tension: ICE and DHS assert authority to detain adults for immigration violations and say protocols exist to protect minors during arrests, but civil‑rights advocates, educators, and some elected officials argue that detaining young children—particularly when they are used to make contact with homes—violates community standards and endangers welfare, a dispute reflected in competing accounts from the school district and DHS [8][5][11]. National figures have weighed in; some lawmakers condemned the detainment and others defended ICE’s actions, underscoring the polarized political stakes [11][10].
5. What reporting confirms and what remains uncertain
Contemporary reporting across multiple outlets confirms that a five‑year‑old and his father were detained and transported to Texas and that Columbia Heights officials allege the child was used to knock on the door [1][3][7]. DHS statements claiming the father fled and that the child was not targeted are also documented [5][9]. What independent sources have not yet fully established from the materials provided here are the precise legal authority used at that moment to take the child into custody, the exact decision tree ICE agents followed on site, and whether the agency’s internal review will change practices — those details are not available in the cited reports (p1_s1–[1]5).
6. Bottom line
The incident shows that ICE operational choices can and do result in children as young as five being taken into custody alongside parents, at least according to local officials and multiple news outlets; the federal agency disputes the characterization that the child was targeted but confirms the family was detained and the child was in agency custody during the operation [1][5]. The episode has triggered legal, political, and community pushback and highlights gaps in publicly available information about on‑the‑ground procedures and safeguards when young children are present during immigration enforcement [2][4].