Is ICE really going door to door, kicking some down to forcefully gain entrance in some US cities?

1. What reporters are showing: door‑to‑door activity in the Twin Cities

Contemporary reporting from outlets including PBS, The Guardian and Reuters describes HSI and ICE personnel going door‑to‑door in Minneapolis–Saint Paul neighborhoods and at businesses as part of a large DHS operation that officials have called the most expansive to date, and local video and eyewitness accounts show agents knocking down at least one door, taking a man into custody, and protesters being hit with chemical spray near operations ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.

2. What “forceful entry” means in the current coverage

The specifics recorded on the ground include agents banging down a door during an operation and the use of a fine mist of pepper spray in clashes with observers — actions that local journalists and residents described as forceful — but none of the provided stories supply a widely corroborated claim using the verb “kicked down” for multiple incidents across cities, so the reporting supports forceful entry and confrontation in Minneapolis but not a documented pattern framed exactly as “kicking” in other U.S. cities ^{[2] [5] [6]}.

3. Federal framing and operational rationale

Federal officials and DHS described the mobilization as a broad investigative surge targeting fraud, human smuggling and unlawful employment practices, with Homeland Security Investigations agents explicitly reported as going door‑to‑door to investigate alleged business and fraud schemes, a framing that the administration and DHS have advanced alongside public announcements about the operation ^{[1] [7]}.

4. Local reaction, civil‑rights concerns and legal pushback

City officials, immigrant‑rights groups and the Minnesota attorney general have characterized the deployments as militarized, unlawful and terrorizing to communities, prompting lawsuits and large protests in Minneapolis after a fatal shooting during an ICE operation; municipal statements and legal filings assert the tactics caused fear, school lockdowns and economic disruption ^{[8] [2] [6]}.

5. The national picture vs. localized reporting

National commentary and fact‑checks note that politicians and pundits have amplified claims about “door‑to‑door” sweeps, but independent verification in the provided reporting is concentrated on the Twin Cities’ Operation Metro Surge rather than a verified, identical pattern in many other U.S. cities; fact‑checking outlets have contested some broad statements about nationwide door‑to‑door programs, underscoring the difference between local documented raids and sweeping national claims ^{[9] [7] [4]}.

6. How to read competing narratives and motives

Coverage comes with clear political valences: federal officials emphasize law‑enforcement goals and the scale of the operation, local governments and advocacy groups stress civil‑liberties harms and illegal tactics, and partisan media amplify each side — all of which suggests reporting is shaped by operational secrecy, public‑safety concerns, and competing political agendas that make independent on‑the‑ground verification especially salient ^{[1] [8] [10]}.

7. Bottom line and limits of available reporting

The evidence in the assembled reporting answers the core question affirmatively for the Twin Cities: ICE/HSI agents have conducted door‑to‑door operations there and in at least some cases used forceful entry and crowd‑control measures and made arrests; the materials provided do not establish that identical “kicking down” tactics are routine across many other U.S. cities, and they leave open important unanswered questions about scope, policy guidance, and accountability ^{[2] [1] [5] [11]}.