BRAZEN Power Grab—ICE Defies Federal Judges

Federal judges ordered the release of Venezuelan nationals detained without warrants or due process, only for ICE to immediately re-arrest them in a brazen defiance of constitutional protections that should alarm every American who values the rule of law.

Story Snapshot

Two federal judges ordered immediate release of eight Venezuelan nationals after finding ICE violated Fifth Amendment due process rights
Judges cited government’s failure to produce warrants, provide legal justification, or conduct proper hearings before detention
ICE conducted armed raid on Minnesota family home without judicial warrant, detaining six people including a 12-year-old child
Judge prohibited re-arrest unless “significant change in circumstances,” but ICE’s compliance with court orders remains uncertain

Constitutional Crisis in Immigration Enforcement

U.S. District Judge Joseph A. Goodwin ordered the immediate release of Antony Segundo Larrazabal-Gonzalez on January 28, 2026, after ICE detained him during a traffic stop on Interstate 77 in West Virginia on January 13. Judge Goodwin found the government violated the Fifth Amendment by confining Larrazabal-Gonzalez without articulating facts or legal authority justifying his detention. The judge emphasized that “freedom is the constitutional default” and that when the government cannot explain why someone is jailed, the detention violates constitutional protections. This ruling underscores a fundamental principle conservatives hold dear: government power must be limited and justified, even in immigration enforcement.

Armed Raid Without Warrant Sparks Judicial Rebuke

In a separate case, U.S. District Judge John Tunheim ordered the release of six Venezuelan family members, including a 12-year-old child, after ICE conducted an armed raid on their St. Paul, Minnesota home on January 15, 2026. Judge Tunheim directed the Department of Homeland Security to produce a judicial warrant by 5 p.m., but when the deadline passed without response, he granted the habeas corpus petition and ordered their release within 72 hours. The government’s inability to provide basic documentation raises serious concerns about executive overreach. While Americans support strong border enforcement, conducting armed raids on private homes without warrants violates the Fourth Amendment protections that safeguard every citizen’s home from unreasonable government intrusion.

Government’s Failed Legal Defense

During court proceedings, Judge Goodwin noted that government attorneys “repeatedly answered ‘I don’t know'” when questioned about the legal basis for detention. The government also declined to offer documents as evidence despite attaching them to legal briefs, revealing a troubling lack of preparation or willingness to justify its actions. Larrazabal-Gonzalez had arrived in the United States in 2023 and was actively participating in immigration proceedings, having attended multiple court dates with another scheduled for October in Atlanta. His compliance with the immigration system makes his warrantless detention particularly problematic. The government argued that detention was mandatory and that sufficient due process had been provided, but judges found these arguments unpersuasive given the absence of documented justification.

Judicial Orders and Enforcement Questions

Judge Goodwin’s ten-page opinion specifically prohibited re-arrest and detention unless there is a “significant change in circumstances” to justify it. He wrote that “the government failed to meet its burden to justify custody” and concluded that “there is no factual record to remand, there is no process to await.” Judge Tunheim ordered DHS to return the Minnesota detainees within 72 hours and provide a status update within five days. However, the current whereabouts and status of all released individuals remain unclear, and available sources do not indicate whether ICE has complied with these judicial orders. The lack of transparency about whether federal agents are honoring court mandates represents a potential constitutional crisis that should concern Americans across the political spectrum.

These cases establish that immigration detention, though characterized as civil rather than criminal, must still comply with Fifth Amendment due process protections. The rulings may influence how ICE conducts future detention operations, requiring more rigorous warrant procedures and constitutional compliance. Other detainees may file similar habeas corpus petitions citing these decisions, potentially constraining enforcement operations unless proper legal procedures are followed. While conservatives support strong immigration enforcement to protect national sovereignty and the rule of law, that enforcement must itself follow the law and respect constitutional limitations on government power.