The Fourth Amendment specifically says the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" without a warrant showing probable cause and due process. It is settled law in the court system that this means a judicially-reviewed and -signed warrant is required to enter a home.

Basically, the Trump administration issued a May 12, 2025 DHS memo (signed by Todd Lyons) saying that no, the "warrant" and "due process" clause is satisfied if the DHS issues its own warrant.

This obviously violates the constitution because then judicial branch is meant to check the executive branch via review of executive action. DHS signing their own warrants means they are acting with inherent biased towards their own personnel, so there is no meaningful due process. It's literally the law enforcement arm also being the judge.

A more detailed legal answer to your question is here: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/can-ice-enter-a-home-to-make-an-arrest-with-only-an-administrative-warrant , and it also links to the whistleblower complaint, which itself has the DHS May 12, 2025 memo as Exhibit 1 (page 17 of the file).

The DHS memo doesn't appear to cite any actual case law (except a footnote that references a Central District of California case that "judicial" warrants are required in that jurisdiction, tellingly), but the link above notes the law is so clear that, to find an explanation, it theorizes that they are relying on dicta (non-binding, non-precedential discussion) in a court opinion from a 1960 case, that suggests (but again, doesn't legally bind) administrative warrants could be considered. That dicta doesn't hold they are valid, and has been contradicted by the Supreme Court multiple times since 1960.

Practical Answer

In short, the Trump administration likely knows this is a completely unconstitutional position. However, they also know it takes time for court challenges to force them to take any action (violate the constitution->victims possibly find counsel->file papers->trial court delays->trial->multiple appeals->Supreme Court).

Therefore, they are openly violating the law. We can't prove their goals, but it seems obvious that Trump and his chief advisor, Stephen Miller are looking for an excuse to declare martial law. By illegally killing, kidnapping and abusing American citizens and residents, they assume the backlash will give them an excuse.

If it doesn't, they will continue and assume that they will either be saved by the extremely right-leaning Supreme Court, or if not, will still have normalized a US gestapo acting with impunity for enough time to scare into silence any meaningful criticism, stop elections, or will simply "comply" with the decision two+ years from now continuing the process with minor changes to the policy that remain unconstitutional but restart the court process.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

That's a well-written explanation, thank you, and it's the Trump administration's game plan on everything.

Pick a policy, any policy, from DOGE to tariffs to blocking funding on a whim, whatever — it's illegal, unconstitutional, or both, but that doesn't matter. If a court blocks them, it'll take months and they'll appeal.

Meanwhile the daily damage is done, and it's permanent. If/when Democrats are again in charge, being Democrats, they'll tinker with the mechanisms a little and pose for smiling pictures, but we'll never see US AID again, and ICE's ginormous budgets will be the norm, etc.