Your fact-checks will appear here
The constraints imposed by the Fourth Amendment on arrests for immigration violations.
Federal immigration officers do not categorically “supersede” state or local law enforcement; ICE is a federal agency whose immigration authorities derive from federal statute and regulations, but tho...
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) distinguishes detainees primarily by legal status and criminal history: it records people as having criminal convictions, pending criminal charges, or no conv...
Federal immigration officers can and do use consensual encounters, ruses and warrantless arrests, but those powers are bounded by a mix of statutory text, Fourth Amendment limits, agency policy and ag...
State laws that mandate cooperation with ICE often collide with local sanctuary ordinances, producing a patchwork of legal obligations where state preemption can override local rules but practical lim...
Administrative warrants under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) are agency-issued civil instruments used by DHS components like ICE to effect arrests, inspections, and removals without a judic...
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) derives its interior arrest and detention powers primarily from federal statutes that authorize officers to arrest removable noncitizens and enforce immigrati...
ICE and Department of Homeland Security use-of-force rules tie deadly force to a narrow standard: officers “may use deadly force only when necessary” and only when they have “a reasonable belief that ...
Police and prosecutors primarily rely on automated detection, forensic hashing, industry reports to NCMEC, and device-forensics to identify people connected to CSAM, with clear forensic pathways when ...