As questions mount over ICE’s expanding enforcement tactics, Jennifer Behm, Partner at Berardi Immigration Law, joined WKBW-TV to break down a leaked Department of Homeland Security memo that has raised serious constitutional red flags.
The memo, first reported by the Associated Press, suggests ICE agents may enter private homes using only administrative warrants signed internally by DHS, rather than judicial warrants approved by a judge. That shift departs from decades of Supreme Court precedent interpreting the Fourth Amendment and has implications far beyond immigration enforcement.
Behm emphasized that the concern isn’t limited to noncitizens.
“Historically the home has received the highest level of constitutional protection, and this memo really chips away at that,” she explained. She also warned that agency guidance should not be used to sidestep the courts: “When you have an agency release a policy that chips away at constitutional protections, that should really be coming from legislation or our Supreme Court, not an agency overriding decades of how we’ve done things.”
In her interview, Behm made clear that enforcing immigration law and protecting constitutional rights are not competing goals. “Strong law enforcement and upholding our constitutional rights are not supposed to be in tension,” she said. “These are not mutually exclusive concepts, and they should go hand in hand.”
Watch The Full Interview Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2HcRM4yytQ
Interview Transcript:
Michael Wooten:
Now to the latest controversy involving ICE’s deportation campaign across America. You may have heard the Associated Press obtained a memo from the Department of Homeland Security authorizing ICE agents to enter a home with only an administrative warrant, which is signed off by DHS personnel.
The new guidance breaks with decades of judicial rulings, including from the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the Fourth Amendment generally requires a warrant signed by a judge before law enforcement can enter a home, except under exigent circumstances.
Jennifer Behm is an attorney and partner at Berardi Immigration Law, and she joins us live here tonight as we try to make sense of this. Jennifer, thanks for being here. What was your reaction when you saw and read this memo that was leaked?
Jennifer Behm:
Thanks for having me. Well, it’s certainly a surprise to see, because historically the home has received the highest level of constitutional protection. And this memo really chips away at that.
Michael Wooten:
DHS has put out a statement in response to all of this, basically saying they’re only entering homes without a judicial warrant when there are final deportation orders for the person who lives there. Do you think that is enough justification to get past this Fourth Amendment protection that we thought was in place for decades now?
Jennifer Behm:
I don’t. I think that it’s a bit concerning, because this is not just an immigration issue. When you have an agency release a policy that chips away at constitutional protections, that should really be coming from legislation or our Supreme Court. The court system—not an agency overriding decades of how we’ve done things. That’s a bit alarming.
Michael Wooten:
I’ve heard some folks pointing out that the way you address this would be through litigation, right? And how do we get to the point where someone who is perhaps the victim of this is able to challenge it in court? Because if the victim of an illegal search and seizure in a situation like this is just deported before they can even challenge it, when do we get clarity on whether or not this is legal?
Jennifer Behm:
Yeah, that’s a great question. If I had a crystal ball and had to guess, I would think that a plaintiff bringing a claim would be an American—perhaps someone who will be physically present in the United States to see this all the way through.
Perhaps ICE may enter a home where someone is not being deported, and that home has been entered by ICE without appropriate documentation or a judicial warrant. So it’s going to be very interesting to see how this case plays out in court and what will happen with this trend.
Michael Wooten:
Finally, Jennifer, what would you say to the person watching who says, “I’m a U.S. citizen, I haven’t broken any laws, I believe we need to be enforcing immigration laws,” and who wonders, “How does this impact me?”
Jennifer Behm:
Strong law enforcement and upholding our constitutional rights are not supposed to be in tension. These are not mutually exclusive concepts, and they should go hand in hand.
So we need to find that happy balance and make sure that these directives are not coming just from agency guidance, but from the Supreme Court and the proper channels of government.
Michael Wooten:
Really great to get your insight on this. Attorney Jennifer Behm, thank you.
Ready to have Berardi on your side?
Whether you’re a business looking to hire or a professional hoping to relocate, immigration law can be complicated. But you don’t have to do it alone. Put our experience to work for you.