4 ms·
They’re relying heavily on administrative warrants, which don’t have the legal force of a judicial warrant and are more like an internal departmental memo. In
by antonvs 9mo ago
They’re relying heavily on administrative warrants, which don’t have the legal force of a judicial warrant and are more like an internal departmental memo.
In particular, administrative warrants don’t authorize entry into a private home without consent, don’t compel state or local law enforcement to act, don’t function like a criminal warrant, and don’t override 4th amendment protections.
Having to rely on judicial warrants would get in the way of one of their primary goals, which is to pacify the US population through fear. It’s why they now use the murders they’ve committed as threats.
- TheCoelacanth 9mo agoAn administrative warrant is no warrant at all. It's just a lie made up to try to trick people into compliance. The constitution clearly says who can issue a warrant and it's not random law enforcement officers.
- antonvs 9mo agoAs I said, it's more like an internal departmental memo. It serves a purpose internally, but trying to use it outside of that context is mostly a category error.
- TheCoelacanth 9mo agoThe document itself may have an internal purpose, but there is no legitimate purpose served by calling it a warrant. That serves purely to mislead.
- antonvs 9mo agoThat's not correct. It's a "warrant" in the literal sense: it authorizes federal immigration agents to detain someone for civil immigration violations. Since they're not judicial warrants, there are constitutional restrictions on how they can do that, which I enumerated in my previous comment. The game ICE is playing takes advantage of the exact misunderstanding you've described - that anything called a warrant must be a judicial warrant. That's not the case, they're just exploiting people's bad assumptions.