Who is Liam Ramos’ father and why was he targeted by ice
Executive summary
Adrian Conejo Arias (also reported as Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias) is the father of five‑year‑old Liam Conejo Ramos and, according to his legal team and several news outlets, an asylum seeker from Ecuador with a pending claim filed after entering the United States in 2024 [1] [2] [3]. He was seized by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during a January driveway arrest in Columbia Heights, Minnesota, which the agency says was a targeted operation against him for an alleged immigration violation, while critics and a federal judge have sharply disputed the handling of the arrest and the decision to detain a small child with his parent [4] [5] [6].
1. Who Adrian Conejo Arias is: asylum seeker from Ecuador with a pending case
Reporting identifies Liam’s father as Adrian Conejo Arias (also shown in some outlets as Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias) and describes him as an asylum seeker from Ecuador who arrived in the U.S. in 2024 and, according to the family’s lawyers, used the CBP One system to declare intent to seek asylum — a claim ICE/DHS has said it has no record of [1] [2] [5]. Legal representatives for the family say Arias has a pending asylum claim that would allow him to remain in the country while it is adjudicated; ICE and DHS characterize him instead as an “illegal alien” whom agents lawfully sought to arrest [3] [5].
2. The operation ICE says targeted the father, not the child
DHS and ICE officials have repeatedly stated that agents were conducting a “targeted operation” to arrest the father and that they did not target or arrest the child, asserting that officers followed procedures — including attempting to place the child with a designated caregiver and alleging the father fled and left the child in a running vehicle — narratives the agency has published publicly [4] [5] [3]. ICE’s characterization is central to the federal government’s defense of the arrest and to its public message that enforcement actions are aimed at adults suspected of immigration violations [4] [5].
3. Conflicting accounts and legal pushback over how and why the arrest happened
Multiple local officials, school administrators and the family’s lawyer contest aspects of the government’s account, saying the father and son had arrived home from preschool when officers detained them in their driveway and that family members offered to care for the child but were allegedly refused [4] [7] [6]. The family’s attorney and several news outlets say Arias entered through a port of entry and used procedural channels, while DHS says it has no record of the CBP One appointment the family cites — a factual dispute that remains unresolved in public reporting [2] [5].
4. Why the case drew judicial scrutiny and public outrage
The image of a five‑year‑old in a blue hat and a federal officer holding his Spider‑Man backpack galvanized national attention and prompted protests, congressional visits and a federal judge’s intervention; a judge ordered the pair released from a Texas family detention center, sharply criticizing the detention as lacking human decency while temporarily blocking removal proceedings [1] [8] [3]. That judicial rebuke and the visceral public reaction reframed the story from a routine enforcement action into a flashpoint in broader debates over immigration enforcement tactics and family detention policy [6] [7].
5. Where reporting leaves open questions and competing agendas
Public accounts consistently show ICE asserting it targeted the father for immigration violations while defenders of the family highlight the asylum claim, the center’s long‑distance transfer of a small child, and inconsistencies in government records about the family’s use of CBP One [5] [2]. Coverage comes from outlets with differing framings — ICE and DHS statements emphasize law enforcement and rule of law [5], while local officials, the family’s lawyer and civil‑rights advocates emphasize humanitarian and due‑process concerns [4] [9] — and available reporting does not yet resolve the underlying factual disputes about how Arias entered, whether procedural safeguards were followed, or the precise chain of decisions that led to Liam being detained alongside his father [3] [5].