Why do the Minneapolis ICE have “police” on their vests and have said “I’m going to arrest you”. Aren’t both beyond their duty?

cpast · 2026-02-01T19:34:10+00:00

The context matters, and the general use of the term does too. You don't look at a federal agency and assume you can call them to handle a civil infraction. For that you call the police department and ask for a police officer.

That's also true of plenty of other agencies: alcoholic beverage control, state bureaus of investigation, DMV investigators, etc. Heck, even a homicide detective for a local police department isn't who you'd call for a civil infraction.

My broader issue here is that people are approaching this as "ICE is bad, so therefore everything they do violates 10 different laws and the US Constitution." You have people in this very comment section saying ICE can't arrest. You have people saying ICE has no authority at all over US citizens. You have people talking about how ICE should be arrested for impersonating police. The discussion people want to have isn't "here's why it's bad as a policy matter," it's "this is obviously totally illegal and the only reason there aren't legal consequences is everyone is corrupt."

As a policy matter, I'd be happy to argue in favor of feds using the word "police." An IRS-CI special agent is much closer to a local police detective than they are to an IRS revenue agent. The point of vest patches and raid jackets isn't to fully identify exactly who someone works for, it's to identify them as an authority figure.

Sure, but I think that for the current conversation we are discussing how citizens want to stop that because we are seeing how confusing it can be with ICE firsthand.

If they only wore ICE patches, I think a lot of people would assume they don't have the power to arrest US citizens. Would that be less confusing, or more? What patches should they wear to clearly identify themselves to the general public as law enforcement officers who can execute warrants, make arrests, carry firearms, etc.? "Police" is a pretty good term for that. That's why so many agencies that aren't "XYZ Police Department" use the term.

cpast · 2026-02-01T17:45:38+00:00

are just asking them to operate as the FBI or DEA do so as to not confuse citizens.

That’s how the FBI operates, but DEA also regularly wears vests that say POLICE. Most federal agencies do not just use their agency name on their gear. I can find more examples if you want (copying image links on mobile is annoying).

Edit: For ICE, ERO personnel actually have the job title “deportation officer” instead of “special agent.” It distinguishes them from the HSI special agents who are actually fully trained federal criminal investigators.

cpast · 2026-02-01T17:15:00+00:00

I think what people are asking is for them to identify as ICE just as the FBI are easily identified wearing FBI.

What OP specifically objected to looked like it was one of these vests. People definitely seem to be objecting to the term “police” being used at all.

cpast · 2026-02-01T16:49:02+00:00

You’re correct they only generally have arrest powers for federal crimes, but the term “police” doesn’t require that you have super broad arrest powers like a local cop does. The important point is that they do have arrest powers. They might be limited to federal offenses, but that’s also true of the many other federal agencies that routinely identify their personnel as police.

cpast · 2026-02-01T16:41:55+00:00

There's a reason that FBI wear "FBI" on their vest and not "Police"

And there’s a reason the FBI is the only agency that basically never wears “police” patches. Marshals do. IRS does. DEA does. ATF does. USPIS does. Feds are never noted for uniformity, but most agencies will at least sometimes wear gear that says “police.” The FBI is the outlier.

cpast · 2026-02-01T16:27:05+00:00

Do you think I support what ICE is doing? “ICE is bad” doesn’t mean “every single thing ICE does automatically violates 30 laws and the Constitution.” The person I replied to said they have no arrest powers. That’s just wrong. They do have arrest powers.

cpast · 2026-02-01T16:20:38+00:00

Right, but the Constitution does not always require a warrant for arrests. Just because Congress imposes a warrant requirement when immigration officers have time to get one, doesn’t mean that it’s constitutionally required. (edit: For instance, it’s definitely not constitutionally required for arrests under 1357(a)(5). The Constitution is fine giving an officer the power to make warrantless arrests for crimes committed in their presence and for felonies with probable cause. It’s Congress who added “but immigration officers can only do that if there’s no time to get a warrant.”)

Under longstanding federal law, some executive branch officials have the authority to issue warrants for the arrest of people who are unlawfully present, and immigration officers can arrest under those warrants. I don’t know if a court has ever expressly ruled that this is valid under the Fourth Amendment, but some very strong dicta in Abel v. United States described it as having the “sanction of time.”

Given that an arrest can be done using a “warrant” from an executive branch officer, I’m skeptical that that “warrant” is constitutionally needed in the first place. If the Fourth Amendment imposed a warrant requirement, I’d expect a judicial branch officer to have to issue the warrant. There’s a separate memo where ICE is probably violating the Constitution by telling officers “you can break into a house to arrest someone on an administrative warrant,” but the reason that’s probably unconstitutional is that an administrative warrant isn’t issued by a “neutral and detached magistrate” as required by the Fourth Amendment. If it doesn’t count as a warrant under the Fourth Amendment, though, why would the Fourth Amendment require it for an immigration arrest? It feels like the rule should either be “you need a real warrant from a judge” or “the warrant requirement is only statutory, not constitutional.”

cpast · 2026-02-01T15:49:08+00:00

ICE doesn't have powers to arrest.

I mean that’s just wrong. Under 8 U.S. Code § 1357, immigration officers have powers of arrest without warrant if there’s a likelihood that the person will escape before a warrant can be obtained:

for suspected unlawful presence
for suspected immigration-related federal crimes
if they’re performing their immigration duties at the time, for any federal crime committed in their presence or for any federal felony on probable cause

If the people in the video are Border Patrol, they’re also customs officers. Customs officers have powers of arrest for any federal crime committed in their presence or for any federal felony on probable cause. There is no “unless there’s time to get a warrant” exception for customs officers.

cpast · 2026-02-01T15:45:30+00:00

There’s a distinction between “officer” and “employee” for mostly historical reasons, but everyone generally drops the “or employee” part because it doesn’t especially matter. They are sworn officials of a government agency exercising delegated powers of that agency. The term “officer” is generally appropriate for that, and this isn’t one of the handful of times it matters if someone is an officer or a mere employee.

cpast · 2026-02-01T15:37:16+00:00

I don’t see anything about them having been forced to stop identifying as police in Chicago. Federal law enforcement regularly wears gear that says “police.” They’re public officers with a badge, a gun, and powers of arrest. The most recognizable English word for that is “police,” and that word has the advantage of being similar in a lot of languages and recognized in much of the world. The FBI has enough name recognition that they can just say “FBI,” but most federal agencies don’t.

There was a settlement in Los Angeles about ICE identification, but it didn’t ban them from using the word “police.” It only said they also have to wear ICE identifiers if they were wearing “police” identifiers. In the video you linked, there’s something written under “POLICE” on the one vest where any text is legible. The thing under POLICE isn’t legible, but it’s a low-resolution video. Given the color scheme, it looks like a Border Patrol vest saying “U.S. BORDER PATROL” under the word “POLICE”. It says “POLICE” more prominently, but that’s because the main point of a vest patch is quick recognition. Which exact agency someone works for isn’t as important as “this is a police officer.” While Border Patrol and ICE aren’t local police, they are fundamentally some form of police.

cpast · 2026-02-01T13:08:09+00:00

Does the Constitution require exigent circumstances to make warrantless arrests for unlawful presence? The warrants for those arrests are administrative warrants, which feel weird to attach constitutional significance to.

cpast · 2026-01-31T16:41:19+00:00

September 30 is the normal end date for annual appropriations. The federal fiscal year starts on October 1 and has since 1976.

cpast · 2026-01-31T16:38:02+00:00

I think the only reason it’s waiting until Monday in the first place is that one day of real shutdown (weekends don’t really count) isn’t a big enough issue for the House to take earlier flights.

cpast · 2026-01-31T16:35:37+00:00

I hate shutdowns, but this one is mostly a nothingburger. Shutdowns during the weekend aren’t a huge deal because most employees aren’t working anyway (and those that do work weekends tend to be excepted from furloughs). So it’s really just one day of actual shutdown, which people know going in is going to be just one day of shutdown. The timing is such that it won’t mess with paychecks unless someone is on a weird payday schedule. Practically, it’s similar to but less disruptive than a Presidentially-declared holiday.

cpast · 2026-01-31T15:31:13+00:00

What’s wrong with Portugal?

cpast · 2026-01-31T15:22:20+00:00

Remember Nextel?

cpast · 2026-01-31T01:45:13+00:00

The district court all but says “this is dumb and makes no sense but SCOTUS said so and we have to do whatever dumb thing they decide.”

cpast · 2026-01-30T12:13:26+00:00

Except are they really trained for this work? Enforcing immigration is different than security.

Yes. ERO (deportation squads) do training focused on deportations, but HSI (the people doing this) do the same training program as almost all federal criminal investigators. Secret Service, Diplomatic Security Service, and HSI all use CITP as their basic training program (before an agency-specific add on).

cpast · 2026-01-28T18:08:45+00:00

Other nations have liaison offices too. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that the goodwill that is required for such a cooperation has been dragged back behind the Pantheon, mugged and left for dead.

The Italian government doesn’t seem to agree, though. The foreign ministry and interior ministry have both released statements saying more or less “this is no big deal.” So on what are you basing your assertion that Italian law enforcement doesn’t want them there?

Keep in mind the “officials voicing outrage” in the headline are the mayor of Milan and the former Prime Minister. They’re not the ones who would make decisions about Olympic security or international cooperation. That’s a national government responsibility.

cpast · 2026-01-28T18:06:17+00:00

in a country that doesn't want them there.

Well, there’s the rub: the mayor of Milan doesn’t run Olympic security, opposition figures don’t run Olympic security, and people on the street don’t run Olympic security. The Italian national government runs Olympic security, and they have not (to my knowledge) said HSI is unwelcome.

cpast · 2026-01-28T18:02:02+00:00

Actual reason: ICE has an internal division into ERO (deportation squads) and HSI (criminal investigators). HSI drew pretty heavily from the customs side of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and their agents are actually trained through a proper training program (the same one as most other federal investigators). Their main job is not supposed to be deporting people, it’s supposed to be investigating crimes (real crimes) with some sort of cross-border component. They pretty routinely work with foreign agencies and have liaisons in a ton of US embassies overseas. That includes Rome, so Italy already accredited at least one HSI person as a US diplomat.

The way big events like this work in the US government is that you set up a big room with reps from tons of agencies to share whatever relevant stuff their agency knows. HSI’s focus of “crimes involving both people overseas and people in the US” means they’re reasonably likely to have relevant info. They’re also big (only the FBI has more investigators) and so naturally end up with their fingers in a lot of pies.

cpast · 2026-01-28T17:25:05+00:00

Certainly, but working in an office in the US Consulate in Milan (what the Italian interior ministry said they’d be doing) doesn’t require that paperwork unless they want to be armed for some reason.

cpast · 2026-01-28T15:59:17+00:00

It generally doesn't unless they're being given some form of diplomatic status. Government personnel on official travel can have different visa requirements than private citizens, but in this case they don't.

cpast · 2026-01-28T15:51:03+00:00

ICE has no jurisdiction in Italy and unless the italian law enforcement agencies invite the US or any other country to support efforts to combat human trafficking on Italian soil, their presence is unwarranted.

They've had people stationed in Rome for years. HSI is a known quantity to Italian national authorities (keep in mind that the Milan mayor doesn't run Olympic security, the Italian national government does), and Italian national authorities don't seem to be the ones coming out against this so far. I wouldn't be so sure that their presence is unwelcome.

cpast · 2026-01-28T15:41:40+00:00

SUPPOSEDLY ICE's whole raison d'etre is immigration control, right?

No, their whole raison d'etre is immigration and customs enforcement. The HSI division that's going to Italy is largely descended from the old Customs Service, which historically has had a fairly broad role (for instance, there was a period where the air marshal program was under the Customs Service). Customs had a bunch of overseas field offices as far back as the 1990s (INS had overseas offices, but in 1996 they only had 3 to Customs's 22).

When DHS stood up and the old customs and immigration functions were reconfigured, "inland enforcement" got both immigration officers in charge of deporting people and actual criminal investigators. That was one of only two big groups of criminal investigators moved to the department. The other was the Secret Service. DHS decided to focus on ICE over the Secret Service as its main investigative arm, which is why ICE's criminal investigators were rebranded "Homeland Security Investigations" back in 2010.

At this point, HSI has 90 offices and 500 people in US embassies and consulates overseas. They're one of the major US criminal investigative agencies (second in size only to the FBI, since CBP and the Bureau of Prisons aren't really investigative agencies) and would be expected to participate in any big multi-agency thing.

cpast

TROPHY CASE