Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has begun restricting some of its most controversial practices in immigration operations, including entering homes without a warrant and making arrests at immigration courts, NBC News reported, citing federal officials. According to the report, senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have given verbal instructions to regional offices across the country instructing agents to avoid entering homes without a warrant issued by a judge. This practice had been widely criticized by civil rights organizations, which argue possible violations of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Changes after criticism and controversy

One of the episodes that marked a turning point occurred in Minneapolis, where a series of raids resulted in the deaths of two US citizens, Alex Pretti and Nicole Renee Good, both 37 years old. The case generated criticism from both Democratic and Republican legislators, as well as community groups.

Following these events, the White House removed the then-Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, from her post. His tenure had been closely linked to more aggressive immigration enforcement strategies, such as community raids and courthouse arrests. Instead, Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin was confirmed, who, during his Senate hearing, indicated that he would push for changes in how ICE conducts its operations. Among his priorities, he emphasized the need for agents to obtain warrants before entering homes.

Fewer arrests in immigration courts

Another relevant adjustment is the reduction of detentions within immigration courts. According to officials cited by NBC, agents will now only proceed with arrests in these spaces when there is a final deportation order against the person.This measure contrasts with previous policies implemented in recent months, when judges were instructed to dismiss asylum applications from the bench, allowing agents to detain applicants immediately after their hearings. The practice had generated fear among immigrant communities, as many people avoided attending their court dates for fear of being arrested, further complicating their legal processes. Immigration lawyers consulted indicated that they have already observed a significant decrease in these types of detentions, which could make it easier for more migrants to continue their cases in the judicial system. While authorities have not formally announced these changes, sources agree that it is a strategic adjustment in response to the political, legal, and social pressure that federal agencies have faced in recent months. Analysts point out that these modifications could represent an attempt to balance the application of immigration law with respect for constitutional rights, in a context where the issue remains one of the most polarizing on the national agenda. Analysts point out that these modifications could represent an attempt to balance the application of immigration law with respect for constitutional rights, in a context where the issue remains one of the most polarizing on the national agenda. in a context where the issue remains one of the most polarizing on the national agenda.Analysts point out that these modifications could represent an attempt to balance the application of immigration law with respect for constitutional rights, in a context where the issue remains one of the most polarizing on the national agenda.Analysts point out that these modifications could represent an attempt to balance the application of immigration law with respect for constitutional rights, in a context where the issue remains one of the most polarizing on the national agenda.