BDKJMU wrote: ↑Mon Mar 23, 2026 8:21 pm
UNI88 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 23, 2026 4:54 pm
Why is a judicial warrant a non-starter?Administrative warrants are for regulatory/compliance inspections (health, safety, codes). Breaking into a home with an administrative warrant is a violation of the Constitution.
Why do you hate the Constitution? Why do you hate individual liberty?
For decades, Congress and SCOTUS have recognized the Constitutionality of administrative warrants in cases of immigration enforcement.
Requiring a judicial warrants for the 1.6 million illegals who have had their cases adjudicated and received a final order of removal from immigration judges, who have ALREADY received full due process, is a completely unnecessary and. not Constitutional required step that would burden the entire system. Everyone knows that requiring judicial warrants for the arrest of every single illegal alien would slow additional requirement for judicial warrants would significantly curtail immigration enforcement efforts.
Why do you hate the Constitution?
Why do you hate the rule of law?
Why do you love protecting criminal illegal aliens from arrest and deportation?
Administrative warrants do have a role in immigration enforcement, but they don’t authorize entry into a private home. Courts have consistently required consent or a judicial warrant for that under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
But more importantly, the issue here isn’t just administrative vs. judicial warrants. It’s that the government is relying on a “civil” label while imposing consequences that look a lot like criminal punishment.
When people are subject to prolonged detention or removal in ways that function like incarceration or exile, it raises a bigger question: why should the government be allowed to use reduced procedural protections in those situations?
At some point, if enforcement operates like criminal punishment in practice, it should come with comparable constitutional safeguards.
