An ICE whistleblower says officers are graduating without proper training and entering homes using “administrative warrants.” Hear the testimony from a shadow congressional hearing investigating immigration raids and potential violations of the Fourth Amendment.
Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links
- Contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal
- Support Congressional Dish via Patreon (donations per episode)
- Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com
- Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney
- Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com
- Use your bank’s online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536.
Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish
Thank you for supporting truly independent media!
Contact Your Members of Congress: (202) 224-3121
Background Sources
Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes
CD320: One Big Beautiful Bill — a Dangerous Law
Racial Profiling
“Justice Brett Kavanaugh and racial proxies.” César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández. September 23, 2025. SCOTUSblog.
Garrison Gibson
“Man released from ICE custody a second time after warrantless arrest.” Alaysia Lane. January 23, 2026. The Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder.
“Judge orders release of Liberian man arrested in Minneapolis by agents with a battering ram.” The Associated Press. January 16, 2026. NBC News.
“Arrest of Garrison Gibson, a Liberian man arrested in Minneapolis, may have been a ‘blatant violation.’” Kay Wicker. January 15, 2026. The Grio.
Administrative Warrants
“DHS Warrantless Home Entry Memo’s Fourth Amendment Problem.” Hannah James. February 4, 2026. Brennan Center for Justice.
“We Were Top Homeland Security Lawyers. You Can’t Wish Away the Fourth Amendment.” Stevan Bunnell et al. February 2, 2026. The New York Times.
“US Judge Rules ICE Raids Require Judicial Warrants, Contradicting Secret ICE Memo.” Dell Cameron and Matt Giles. January 23, 2026. Wired.
“Can ICE Enter a Home to Make an Arrest With Only an Administrative Warrant?” Orin Kerr. January 22, 2026. Lawfare.
“Do ICE agents need a signed judicial warrant to enter private property?” J. Craig Anderson. Published January 19, 2026; updated February 2, 2026. Portland Press Herald.
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980)
DHS Secretary Shakeup
“A $220 million ad blitz and a public split with Trump mark the end of Kristi Noem’s DHS tenure.” Rebecca Santana. March 6, 2026. AP News.
“What Markwayne Mullin Has Said About ICE, Immigration, Border Security.” Jordan King. March 6, 2026. Newsweek.
“GOP senator challenges Teamsters head to a fight in a fiery exchange at a hearing.” Mary Clare Jalonick. November 14, 2023. AP News.
Audio Sources
Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
March 3, 2026
Witness:
- Kristi Noem, then Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
55:50 Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA):
This for the record today, please briefly discuss how the administrative warrant works and how often they’re used.
Kristi Noem:
Well, an administrative warrant is utilized on a regular basis because it’s the process that Congress has given us. It’s the process in immigration law that you’ve given us to ensure that someone is returned back to their home country. And I would say that most of the time when it gets talked about, it’s inaccurate. In the 400,000 cases that ICE has used these administrative warrants, only 28 times have they been used to enter a home. So it is the legal process that we have, that we follow, as given to us by Congress, and it’s been affirmed by the Supreme Court as the correct way to follow the law. We will continue using this tool as it’s important in the duties that the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for.
2:08:25 Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE):
A whistleblower recently testified that ICE’s training process is, “deficient, defective and broken,” raising concerns about how you cut training time in half, reducing training hours by 240, and cut out key courses on the use of force and constitutional obligations. He also testified to a culture of fear that pervades ICE and a constant effort to churn out more trained officers in order to achieve higher numbers. Your Department put out a statement that the training is the same number of hours that officers have always received. So let’s be clear. Is it your sworn testimony today, Madam Secretary, that training hours have not been reduced for any recruit compared to where they were, say, a year ago?
Kristi Noem:
Senator, our ICE officers are trained when they come on board the department, 56 days. We’ve changed the format of those days. Instead of five days a week, eight hours a day, they now do six days a week, 12 hour days. We also give them 28 days of on the job training so they can have more hands on experience with individuals that have served a longer period of time in law enforcement, and have that experienced officer supporting them going forward. What I would say about your whistleblower is that your whistleblower came to FLETC, which is the Academy where we train over 130 different federal law enforcement agencies. He came there after we had changed our program and didn’t experience how we trained our ICE officers previous to that, on those five days a week, eight hours a day. I don’t know how he would speak to how ICE used to do that, and this individual was only detailed there for a short period of time, a few months, and was a trial attorney, not an expert.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE):
Secretary, do you specifically train new recruits on the requirements of the First Amendment and policing? I recognize that your agents, in a number of places around the country have faced protests, protests for how they’ve been conducting their policing. Do you specifically train your new recruits on how to handle peaceful protesters in the context of the First Amendment and their rights?
Kristi Noem:
Yes, they are trained in that, and they are annually trained and updated with legal guidance, with constitutional provisions, de-escalation, techniques, in driving techniques, medical aid, intervening, use of force. All of those are things that our individual officers are trained on. What has happened —
Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE):
On January 22nd, you put out a press release that said Enforcement and Removal Operations, ERO training, was 42 days. But on February 23 just a month later, the same day that the whistle blower testified, you issued a new press release saying it was 56 days. You seem to be making it up as you go along. Help me understand how you square those quite different numbers in terms of the total number of training days?
Kristi Noem:
Our training for ICE officers is at 56 days, with 28 days of on the job experience that they get as well. That continues their training, and their specialized training is above and beyond that as well.
2:27:10 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Wouldn’t you agree with me that no US citizen, simply working lawfully, should be arrested?
Kristi Noem:
In law enforcement operations across the country, there are times when US citizens —
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
It’s a simple yes or no
Kristi Noem:
— may be arrested or detained until their identity is confirmed and that they haven’t committed a crime.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Would you agree with me, Madam Secretary, that U.S. citizens should not be arrested when they are obeying the law, they have no criminal record, and they are engaged in a lawful activity?
Kristi Noem:
Sir, in situations where law enforcement, regardless of the agency, across the country, when there is problems —
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Well, let me tell you about…
2:33:55 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Let me ask you about a memo that evidently was written by the acting director of ice. This memo, have you seen it?
Kristi Noem:
I can’t tell what it says. I’ve seen lots of memos. I see many, many a day.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Well, this memo by acting director Todd Lyons, it’s been frequently referenced in the hearing that I conducted by the whistleblower who testified, Ryan Schwank, as being the basis for instructing ICE agents. It specifically says that ICE agents should violate the Fourth Amendment and break into people’s homes without a judicial warrant. Do you agree with it?
Kristi Noem:
I will look at that memo, sir. I can’t read it from here, but if it’s referencing administrative warrants, that is the proper legal tool that this body has given us to utilize on immigration enforcement operations, those administrative warrants were provided and affirmed by the Supreme Court and we will continue to use those.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
How do you square that concern for waste, which I share with the fact that you have spent $220 million running television advertisements that feature you prominently?
Kristi Noem:
Sir, the President tasked me with getting the message out to the country and to other countries where we were seeing the invasion come from with putting commercials out that told them that if they were in this country illegally, that they needed to leave, or we would detain them and remove them, and they’d not get the chance to come back to America the right way. That has been extremely effective.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
The President asked you to run these advertisements. Is that right?
Kristi Noem: We had that conversation, yes, before I was put in this position and sworn in and confirmed, and since then, as well.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
My research shows that you did not bid them out. In fact, one of the people you picked, Safe America Media ,was a company formed 11 days before you picked them, and that the Strategy Group got most of the money, and the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
The President approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?
Kristi Noem:
Yes, sir, we went through the legal processes, did it correctly.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
Did the President know you were going to do this?
Kristi Noem:
Yes.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
He did?
Kristi Noem:
Yes.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA):
Okay.
Terrorizing Communities Without Warrants and No Restraint
Democrats from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
February 23, 2026
Witnesses:
- Ryan Schwank, Former Assistant Chief Counsel, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
- Teyana Gibson Brown, U.S. Citizen
- Stevan Bunnell, Former General Counsel, Department of Homeland Security
Clips
4:45 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
The numbers of people have skyrocketed from 500 a year to more than 3500.
5:30 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
The same head of ICE who contended incorrectly about officer training, also testified about the memorandum in which he announced the administration’s new policy to invade American homes based on a permission slip signed by his own employees, in violation of the Constitution, which was distributed to all ICE personnel. When I asked for the email distributing that memo, he assured me that ICE would produce it. They still haven’t responded, because the email doesn’t exist.
10:30 Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA):
Now, as of February of this year, Oversight Democrats have documented over 530 credible and verified instances of possible abuses and misconduct by President Trump’s federal immigration agents, including 224 incidents just with use of force.
11:15 Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA):
I mean, you look at the Fourth Amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Now what’s the most important here is the amendment specifies people, not just United States citizens, but all people, for a specific reason.
17:00 Teyana Gibson Brown:
My name is Teyana Gibson Brown, and today I stand before you not just to speak but to bear witness. I am here to share a deeply personal and painful experience, how me and my family’s Fourth Amendment [rights] were violated.
18:05 Teyana Gibson Brown:
Garrison went to the door and asked the officers through the closed door about why they were at our home. Followed with this, he asked them if they had a warrant. The officers at the door told Garrison that they did have an warrant, and it was signed by a judge. When Garrison asked to see the warrant, the officer simply ignored his request. Although my husband and I may not be experts in the legality of some situations, we are aware of the fundamentals and understood how the Fourth Amendment shielded us from arbitrary government searches and seizures. Given this, my husband repeatedly requested to see the warrant. The circumstances outside of our home only intensified. We knew our rights though, we knew no one could just barge into our homes without a warrant, because this space was ours. The officers started surrounding our property.
19:45 Teyana Gibson Brown:
Ten officers approached my front door. They looked like SWAT agents holding each other’s shoulders like a barricade.
20:05 Teyana Gibson Brown:
The officers walked up to my door and started ramming the door. They hit the door three times until the door popped open. My stomach fell. I heard the door pop and I realized we were no longer protected. Far away from ever experiencing anything like this, we’ve never known anything of the sort. The officers stood at the door, and they were pointing their guns at us. 10 officers that were all armed were standing in front of me and my family. Words can never be sufficient for me to portray what sorts of horror we felt in this moment. I stood between the officers and Garrison, and I asked the officers yet again to show me the warrant. Despite all of this, they did not show me anything. My daughter and my little cousin, both children, were rushed from the room by my sister and were told to hide in the closet. The fear in my daughter’s eyes is something you can’t imagine.
21:30 Ryan Schwank:
My name is Ryan Schwank. I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution when I joined ice on August 1, 2021 as an Assistant Chief Counsel. I followed that oath for four and a half years, working side by side with ICE officers, and I followed it when I resigned on February 13, 2026, a little over a week ago, so that I could speak to you today. I am here because I am duty bound to report the legally required training program at the ICE Academy is deficient, defective, and broken. Five months ago, I was asked to teach the law to new cadets at the ICE Academy in Glynco, Georgia, where ICE is training its new, inexperienced recruits, those without law enforcement training. I volunteered to take on this assignment based on my experience in law enforcement oversight, including at the state and local level prior to my work with ICE. On my first day, I received secretive orders to teach new cadets to violate the Constitution by entering homes without a judicial warrant. For the last five months, I watched ICE dismantle the training program, cutting 240 hours of vital classes from a 584 hour program, classes that teach the Constitution, our legal system, firearms training, the use of force, lawful arrests, proper detention, and the limits of officers’ authority. For example, they ceased all of the legal instructions regarding use of force. This means that cadets are not taught what it means to be objectively reasonable, the very standard which the law requires them to meet when deciding whether or not to use deadly force. Our jobs as instructors are to teach them so well that they can make split second decisions about what they can and cannot do in life or death situations. Yet, in the name of churning out an endless stream of officers, DHS leadership has dismantled the academic and practical tests that we need to know if cadets can safely and lawfully perform their job, all to satisfy an administration demanding they train thousands of new officers before the end of the year. DHS told the public that new cadets receive all the training they need to perform their duties, that no critical material or standards have been cut. This is a lie. ICE made the program shorter, and they removed so many essential parts that what remains is a dangerous husk. No reasonable person would believe a training program suddenly cut nearly in half could meet the minimum legal requirements. These aren’t abstract rules. They’re required in regulations such as HCFR 287(g)1. Congress requires immigration officers to meet minimum standards for a reason. ICE cannot lawfully perform their duties, make arrests, carry weapons and use force without passing appropriate training. New cadets are graduating from the Academy despite widespread concerns among training staff that even in the final days of training, the cadets cannot demonstrate a solid grasp of the tactics or the law required to perform their jobs. Without reform, ICE will graduate thousands of new officers who do not know their constitutional duty, do not know the limits of their authority, and who do not have the training to recognize an unlawful order. That should scare everyone. DHS assures the public these cadets can get on the job training to compensate for anything missing at the academy. This is a lie. Many graduates go to their home office just long enough to get their gun, their badge and their body armor before deploying to places like Minneapolis and other ICE operations with minimal supervision. It’s shocking that anyone would think this is safe or responsible. And this pattern of lies is not isolated. It extends beyond the training program to include deceiving Congress and the public about the rules followed by ICE officers once they graduate.
26:05 Ryan Schwank:
On my first day at the Academy, I was instructed to read and return a memo in my supervisor’s presence which claimed ICE officers could enter homes without a judicial warrant. The acting ICE Director authorized the very conduct that DHS in its own 2025 legal training materials had called the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed, that is physical entry of the home without consent or a proper warrant. Never in my career had I ever received such a blatantly unlawful order, nor one conveyed in such a troubling manner. Incredibly, I was being shown this memo in secret by my supervisor, who made sure that I understood that disobedience could cost me my job. ICE is teaching cadets to violate the Constitution, and they were attempting to cloak it in secrecy by demanding that I lie about it.
27:05 Ryan Schwank:
I am here to convey to the public the danger that is being created at the ICE Academy. I know from my conversation with many facility members, many of the faculty, that I am not alone in my fear. Law enforcement is a deadly serious business. It is not a place for shortcuts. Deficient training can and will get people killed. It can and will lead to unlawful arrests, violations of constitutional rights, and a fundamental loss of public trust in law enforcement. ICE is lying to Congress and the American people about the steps it is taking to ensure its 12,000 new officers faithfully uphold the Constitution and can perform their jobs.
28:10 Steve Bunnell:
My name is Steve Bunnell. I was the General Counsel of the Homeland Security Department from 2013 until 2017. I previously had served 17 years as a career federal prosecutor, including several years as the Chief of the Criminal Division in the US Attorney’s office here in Washington, DC.
28:30 Steve Bunnell:
I am one of six former general counsel and acting general counsel of DHS who recently co-authored a guest essay in the New York Times disagreeing with ICE’s new policy of relying on administrative arrest warrants to forcibly enter private residence to arrest someone for a civil immigration violation. The six of us included top DHS lawyers from the Bush administration, the Obama administration, the first Trump administration and the Biden administration. This is a group that doesn’t agree on policy issues always, but we all agreed on this point, the judicial warrant is a requirement of the Fourth Amendment, and it applies to ICE just like it applies to every other federal, state and local law enforcement agency.
30:35 Steve Bunnell:
It is a basic principle of the Fourth Amendment that searches and seizures inside a home without a judicial warrant are presumptively unreasonable. Indeed, as Mr. Schwank just said, The Supreme Court has stated that the physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the working of the Fourth Amendment is directed. The law is also clear, as Representative Garcia pointed out, that you can’t enter someone’s home without a warrant that’s been issued by a neutral and detached magistrate or judge. In other words, the police can’t sign their own warrants.
31:45 Steve Bunnell:
As Representative Garcia noted, it’s important to point out that in the context of immigration enforcement, the Fourth Amendment says the people have the right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. It doesn’t say citizens. It says the people. It’s thus well established that the Fourth Amendment applies to everyone within the physical boundaries of the United States, including immigrants who are not lawfully present.
32:10 Steve Bunnell:
ICE claims that its general statutory detention authority combined with a final removal order by an immigration judge is sufficient to satisfy the Fourth Amendment, but that argument doesn’t work. Immigration judges are not neutral and detached judicial officers within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. They work for the executive branch and are subject to the control of the President and the Attorney General. Immigration judges also lack the statutory authority to issue warrants either for an arrest or for a search.
36:00 Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA):
Now, Mr. Schwank, before this new policy that you reported about, would it have been legal for these officers to come into Ms. Gibson’s home without a warrant signed by a judge?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Congressman. No, the answer is, it would not have been legal, either before or after this memo came out, for them to go into that home.
37:50 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Mr. Schwank, I think you’ll recognize this memo. It is a memo written by acting director Lyons. We’ve seen it before at this hearing. It says, in effect, ICE officers should violate the Fourth Amendment. Were you taught or told that you should train ICE agents in accordance with this memo?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator, yes. On the very first day I arrived at Glynco to teach, I was told that we were to instruct cadets to follow the instructions in this memo, but that we would not write down any of those instructions, that we would not keep a record that we taught it to them.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
That’s a critical point, because I asked Acting Director Lyons whether this memo was distributed, and he said, in fact, that it was with an email that so far they have failed to produce. What you’re saying is that you were told not to reveal it, correct?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator, yes, I was told not to discuss this memo. In fact, when it was shown to me, I was told not to take notes on it, that I was not allowed to write down any part of it. And for the record as an attorney for ICE and someone who routinely receives memos and memoranda issued by the agency, this had never crossed my desk before I arrived at the academy.
40:25 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Is it a fact that there was an elimination, not just a reduction in hours of training by almost half, but also on critical substance matters, topics that should have been trained?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator, that is accurate. What you’re looking at on those two charts. The shorter one is the amount of testing that’s given now in practical exams. The longer one are the practical exams that were given by ICE in its training program before the current surge training course. Those exams that you see there, the longer list, every single one of those was designed to test whether or not cadets could apply in the real world the things they were learning in the academy, vital lessons on things like how to use their firearms safely, how to encounter an individual they intended to detain, much like Ms. Gibson Brown’s husband. Classes that teach them how to do their job safely and lawfully were removed from testing. And what testing was left was reduced or essentially neutered by the way it was given. Tests that were designed and written to be closed book where cadets were tested on what they could remember, because again, go back, I said this earlier, officers have a split second to decide something. So everything we do is oriented to giving them that split second to act, and they have to know everything for it. We took away the ability to test whether they could.
42:45 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Just in the time that we’ve released these documents, DHS has come forth with a statement. I’m going to quote it. “Under these new improvements, candidates still learn the same elements and meet the same high standards ICE has always required. No subject matter has been cut.” Is that statement accurate, Mr. Schwank?
Ryan Schwank:
Senator, that statement is not accurate, not in even the slightest sense.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
It is untrue, would you agree?
Ryan Schwank:
Sir, I would call it a lie.
51:40 Ryan Schwank:
What was taken out of the training were classes on use of force, specifically, classes taught by the legal department, as well as classes taught by other units. What was taken out was almost 16 hours of firearms training classes to teach them how to use their weapons correctly and safely. What was taken out were classes on how the Constitution works, what the constitutional requirements are for their job and the constitutional limits on their authority. In fact, the class where we talk to the officers and teach them about the rights of protesters was cut from a two hour program into about 10 minutes. They got shoehorned into a lecture on what the concept of a seizure is. There are others. There are many other classes that were cut, but I think these are the most critical for your question.
56:40 Rep. Emily Randall (D-WA):
What about racial profiling? Can you tell us what guidance was provided to ICE agents regarding racial profiling?
Ryan Schwank:
Yes, Representative, in the training material that we taught, the material calls for the department to follow the Department of Justice’s guidelines on the use of race and other factors in law enforcement operations. But, in practice, what the cadets are taught is to follow what’s called the Kavanaugh stop. That is that they are allowed to use race as a factor, not the sole factor, but a factor in their operations.
1:00:20 Steve Bunnell:
Yes, there may be some probable cause that somebody is removable, but a warrant is usually something for somebody who is a fugitive, right? As I understand Mr. Gibson’s situation, he had removal orders. He received a removal order in 2009 and he’d been checking in regularly as he was supposed to.
1:09:00 Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV):
Sensitive locations. I’m curious, how did ICE handle sensitive locations prior to what we are seeing now, in your experience? Let me clarify, sensitive locations of schools and churches and even the courthouse. I’m curious how that has changed.
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator. So the answer to that question is that before the current administration, there were strict rules about any attempt to make an arrest at those locations, and those rules basically boiled down to, Don’t do it, don’t enter those locations.
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV):
Why?
Ryan Schwank:
Because of their sensitive nature, because an ICE officer entering into a church, a school, a courthouse has the effect of convincing people not to go to those places, to avoid them. And when people avoid going to church, school or court, they step away from the rights and the roles they have in our civic society. It pushes them away from it and gives them less power to protect themselves.
1:11:25 Steve Bunnell:
I think there is some confusion, certainly in the public discourse, about what ICE is doing when they’re out making these arrests. They are not enforcing criminal law. They’re not going after somebody who’s a suspected murderer or rapist who’s out on the lam. And they’re not arresting them so they be prosecuted and put into jail. They are going out to detain and remove that person out of the country. If they’re from Mexico, they’ll go back to Mexico and they’ll be set free.
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV):
Not to be detained indefinitely.
Steve Bunnell:
Long enough to be removed, basically. Sometimes that is a long period of time. I mean, there are lots of people who are subject to orders of removal, like Mr. Gibson, who are not a public safety risk, who are not a flight risk, and therefore are not detained. They’re released into the community with conditions. And you know, in his case, he was adhering to those conditions for 17 years. So you know, these are not, in his instance, these are not the worst of the worst. These are not dangerous people. But they have civil rights. They have constitutional rights, just like everybody else.
1:12:45 Steve Bunnell:
And you know, one of the things that gets lost here kind of dovetails with the lack of training. All of these agents and the lawyers take an oath to defend and protect the Constitution. It would be nice if they were trained on what the Constitution is. The Homeland Security Act says as part of its mission, the department is supposed to protect civil liberties, protect privacy. A secure homeland is a homeland in which you have those rights secured, you have the freedoms and securities that the country promises. And so we’re losing sight of the mission. When we don’t pay attention to the Constitution, we don’t pay attention to the oath.
1:14:20 Ryan Schwank: I was genuinely surprised by two things about the cadets I saw at the academy. One was that I routinely met cadets who genuinely wanted to learn and understand what they were supposed to do, that they wanted to do their jobs correctly. I have no doubt that, if given the opportunity, they would do that, but they are cadets who come from a variety of backgrounds. I’ve had cadets who were 18 years old. I had a cadet who we celebrated her 19th birthday in one of our classes. We have cadets who don’t have college degrees. We have cadets for whom English is not their primary language. I was genuinely surprised by the sheer number of cadets we had that were first or second generation immigrants. And these are all people who I think want to do well, but they don’t have the background, and we’re not giving them the training to do this job correctly. We’re not giving them the training to know when they’re being asked to do something that’s not supposed — to do something illegal or wrong.
1:16:55 Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
I do want to enter the record. I know this is Shadow hearing, but it’s important. This is an amazing report on status record reports talking about private prison investors want ICE to escalate. I want the American people to know this. There are people behind the scenes saying, Go, go buy more. You know, cage up more people, because we make more money off of it. Do you know what this says, Ms. Gibson Brown? In this report, it describes how, even though ICE is locking up more neighbors than it ever has before, a record number, 70,000 people that we know of, investors in these private prison companies, CoreCivic and GEO Group, are frustrated that, “ICE’s record immigration detention numbers aren’t high enough.” They’re not high enough. No, no information leaked out. The violent kidnappings, the murders, incarceration of our loved ones is fueling record profits for these companies, and it’s still not enough to satisfy their greed. What’s scary is that CoreCivic alone’s profit spiked up $116.5 million in 2025. A 70% increase, y’all, from the previous year. 70% increase. GEO Group, which has one of the largest for profit, I call it an ICE warehouse, center in Baldwin, three hours outside of Detroit. George Zoley, who called called the first year of Trump’s second term the most successful year for them. That company, for instance, GEO Group, made $254 million in profit last year, in 2025. Both companies are projecting even larger profits this year. In 2026 already, and we’re not even in March yet, an ICE CBP plan to cage tens of thousands of our loved ones in unsafe warehouses, they want to build a warehouse in Romulus, which is a suburb right outside of Detroit. The companies and the administration do not view us as human beings. They view us as potential profit and shareholder value. That’s exactly how they talk about it. They don’t even care about what process is being followed. All they care is about selling more military gear and how many beds, or what they call, you know, people they can have in there. I have, personally, three residents of mine who are begging, Rashida, I said deport me. Send me. Send me, you know, since July, because they can’t stand it, there’s already been attempted suicide at North Lake in Baldwin, Michigan. Since July, let me go back. I have family in my native homeland. Let me go back. They will not let them go back, because the longer they have them in there, the more money they make.
1:24:10 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
To your knowledge, was this memo ever distributed?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator. To my knowledge, this memo was never distributed to staff in general. In fact, when I came to the academy in September, I had never seen it, despite being a counsel for the agency. I never saw it again after it was shown to me the first time, and maybe one other time it was shown to me. Other than someone physically handing me the document, I never saw it again. And right before I left, I checked the repository where the agency keeps a copy of every official memo and policy guidance that is in effect, and there is no copy of it there. And Senator, I will point out to you, if we look at this document, if we look at it, every memo issued by ICE has a control number. It has something on it that indicates that it is an official policy document and where it falls in the agency’s archives, and that’s not on this document anywhere. Also, anytime we issue a memo, there is something in the document to control its release, something that says law enforcement only, or for official use only, classified, secret, something, and there is nothing on this memo that says that. Nowhere on this memo is there anything that would let you know that this is an official policy of the agency, and to my knowledge, it’s never been disseminated as one. It’s been handed out piecemeal to people to use when the agency thinks they need to.
1:25:55 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
You started your job at ICE in September of last year. This memo dates from May. How did you first see this memo?
Ryan Schwank:
Thank you, Senator. So I’ve been with ICE for about four and a half years, but I was an instructor at Glynco from September. The memo was shown to me by my supervisor at Glynco. It was given to me in person with instructions that I could read it but not take any notes on it, that I could read it in their presence, and that was it, and that I was going to teach from it, but I couldn’t keep a copy of it to reference, and I couldn’t document that I taught it to anyone, just that I could read it.
1:27:40 Ryan Schwank:
So what the cadets were told to do was that they had the authority to make an arrest, under this memo, in someone’s home. That they should knock on the door, and if the person did not open, as Ms. Gibson Brown’s family did, that they could use force to enter that home, reasonable force to execute the I-205 administrative removal order. That’s what we were teaching cadets at the academy. That’s what we were told to teach them. And I will tell you what I taught my classes. I would tell the cadets that this policy existed, and I would tell them that they needed to check with their local office before they did anything, because there was no legal basis for this. But I did tell them this was the agency policy.
1:28:25 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Were you apprehensive that a failure to follow this illegal policy might result in demotion or discharge?
Ryan Schwank:
Yes, Senator, I was. In fact, it was made very clear to me, when it was shown to me, that if I did not follow it, I would probably lose my job. Two other attorneys for the agency had just been removed from teaching positions at the academy, one forcibly resigned, and the way was shown to me or told to me was that it was because they disagreed with management over this policy.
1:31:35 Ryan Schwank:
So what the Academy does is we have two types of tests. We have multiple choice exams and we have practical exams. With the multiple choice tests, the cadets went from having to do them in a closed book format, where they had to depend on what they had learned and memorized, to doing them open book and open note, where essentially the only thing we’re really testing them on is their ability to search a document to find the answers. But more important than that, we took away the practical testing. Under the old rules, we took everything they learned in the academy, all that they learned, and we made them apply it. We put them through a range of scenarios where we could test, do they understand when they can enter a home or not? Do they understand when they can make an arrest or not? And if they showed that they did not know that, we could fail them and send them back and make them try again and demonstrate their knowledge. And if they failed twice, out of the academy and maybe six months later, 90 days later, they could come back after they demonstrated to their home office that they were ready. But today, no matter how badly a cadet does at those practical exams, no matter how many mistakes they make, no matter how egregiously they violate the law during a practical, we graduate them.
1:34:25 Ryan Schwank: I have seen examples of cadets who have drawn their firearms on each other by accident. I have seen cadets — and this is in the last day or two of training, so this is at the end of the program — make arrests of individuals that had committed no crime and for which there was no cause to make the arrest, despite the cadet allegedly having been taught the law related to the crimes involved. I have seen officers apply excessive force in these training scenarios where they have made arrest attempts that involved drawing their firearm, using pepper spray, various events that they were not authorized to do and which were not justified by the circumstances, in which no objectively reasonable police officer would have done what they did, and they still graduated. I have seen cadets, and this was a moment that stuck out to me at the academy. I saw a cadet in a scenario where we had bystanders who were allegedly filming or recording what was happening, pull out pepper spray and pepper spray a bystander. And when we asked the cadet afterwards why they did it, their answer was, it’s because I’ve seen what we’re doing in Minneapolis. It doesn’t matter what we teach them about the law if what they watch on television and on Reddit and on the internet tells them that they can get away with things. The Academy can teach them till they’re blue in the face, but if they see that in practice, the real rules are different than what we’re teaching them, they follow the rules that they see.
1:36:35 Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
The day after your husband was illegally taken from your home, a federal judge ordered that he not be removed from Minnesota. Is that correct?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Correct.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
Is that what happened?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
He went to Texas.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
They took him.
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Yeah.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
Kidnapped him and took him to Texas.
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Yes.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
Did ICE quickly realize their error on their own?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
No.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
No, your attorney had to confront Homeland Security. Is that correct?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Absolutely.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
On January 15, a federal judge found that ICE had violated your husband’s rights by illegally breaking into your home and detaining him, and the judge ordered his release from the detention is that correct?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Yes.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
But after your husband was released, he was re-detained for a few hours at the Whipple federal building. Is that correct?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Yes.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
Who is responsible for ordering that your husband be re-detained?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
They said it came from the White House.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI):
Now, per a federal agent, we know for a fact the order came from Steven Miller. Did you know that?
Teyana Gibson Brown:
Yes.
1:47:15 Ryan Schwank:
If the problem was that simple that we just had a bunch of people who don’t like foreigners and want to remove them from our country, and it was all white supremacists, it would actually be a very easy problem to solve. You would just fire them all. But that’s not the root problem. The root problem, Senator, and I say this because there are hundreds, if not thousands, of ICE officers who are immigrants themselves or the children of immigrants — I am the child of an immigrant — the root problem is that we have trained a federal law enforcement agency to go out and perform a job they are not equipped or trained to do. We have sent out officers who are essentially designed and trained to be civil enforcement, to do criminal enforcement, to be crowd control, to be a tool to be used by the administration to bring fear into neighborhoods around the country. And the officers that they are recruiting now are less trained and come from less capable backgrounds than the officers who were already there. When we look at the Renee Good or the Alex Pretti shootings, those are not inexperienced officers. Those are officers who’ve been there for a while, who have knowledge of how to operate and do what they need to do. The officers who entered into Ms. Gibson Brown’s home, from the pictures you showed, probably experienced officers. Everything we’ve seen today, everything we’ve seen through today, has been done by officers who should know better, who should know at the end of the day that it’s their personal responsibility to uphold the Constitution, that they took an oath to it. And I’m going to tell you right now, Senator, that at the Academy, we took out the class that tells the officers they have an oath to the Constitution. We took out the class that tells them they have a duty to uphold the Constitution. We took out the class that tells them that they have personal responsibility, that at the end of the day, no matter what orders they get from their supervisors, it’s on them to do the right thing, and that’s the root problem. These cadets and these new officers don’t have any firmament, any basis on which to stand. They don’t know what they don’t know.
Department of Homeland Security Oversight Hearing
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
February 12, 2026
Witness:
- Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Clips
3:24:05 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
This picture is of ICE agents forcing their way into the Minneapolis home of Garrison Gibson, banging down the door, detaining Mr. Gibson in front of his wife, Teyana, and their 10 year old daughter and niece who happened to be there at the time. I don’t know whether you’re familiar with what happened here. It’s one of many, many, many similar incidents that have happened all around the country, and it was done pursuant to what is called an administrative warrant. I’m going to hold up a copy of that warrant signed by an SDDO who is, I believe, a member of the ICE workforce, another agent, a Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer, not a judge, correct?
Todd Lyons:
Correct, Senator.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
So in effect, this is not a warrant, it’s a permission slip. It’s a green light from another ICE agent to go bash down a door, smash into a home, detain and arrest someone without a judge finding probable cause and without any sort of objective, independent finding. Is that correct?
Todd Lyons:
No, sir. So the I-205 is the arrest warrant, but the I-205 is based on an executable, final order issued by an immigration judge from the Department of Justice.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
And that order is from an immigration judge who is part of the executive branch, not an independent judge. But the warrant issued is simply a permission slip. Now let’s be very clear. You were a local police officer?
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
To bang down a door, barge into someone’s home. If you’re the FBI or a local police officer, you need a judicial warrant from a judicial officer, a judge who is going to find or not probable cause, which has a specific meaning under the law. These ICE agents are banging down doors, doing the same thing without that kind of judicial warrant. What is so different about ICE that it regards itself as an exception to the Fourth Amendment? And the requirement for a judicial warrant is a Fourth Amendment requirement.
Todd Lyons:
We don’t, Senator. There is case law, U.S. v. Lucas 2007 which is out of the Eighth District of Minnesota, which authorizes the entry of a home to catch a fugitive based on administrative warrant.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
I beg your pardon, sir. It does not abrogate the Fourth Amendment. It does not say that ICE agents or CBP agents can simply bash down doors and barge into people’s homes, terrorize their children, detain and arrest people without a judicial warrant, and there is nothing different about what ICE does as compared to the FBI or local police that would justify it.
3:27:50 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
The policy that they’re acting under, in fact, is the result of a memo that you issued in May. You’re familiar with it.
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
It has your signature.
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Which says, in effect, they don’t need judicial warrants. They can act on the basis of the I-205 warrant that you’ve just described, which is administrative, it’s not judicial. Why did you keep this memo secret?
Todd Lyons:
I didn’t keep that memo secret, sir. It was blasted out to —
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
Well we learned about it when two whistle blowers came to us and said that you were using it as a basis for the policy. It was never announced publicly. It was never released to the press or the American people. Why did you keep it secret?
Todd Lyons:
Sir, I didn’t keep it secret. If sending an email to a workforce of 30,000 people is keeping something secret, it’s a bad secret.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT):
It never reached those people.
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir, it did. The email did, sir. Yes, sir, I can work with your committee and your staff to get that.
Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security: ICE, CBP, and USCIS
House Committee on Homeland Security
February 10, 2026
Witness:
- Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Clips
58:05 Todd Lyons:
I’m also proud of our agency’s unprecedented hiring campaign that led to hiring of more than 12,000 officers and special agents in less than a year.
58:55 Todd Lyons:
We are facing the deadliest operating environment in our agency’s history. In fiscal year 2025, death threats against ICE personnel increased more than 8,000%. Assaults on officers have skyrocketed over 1400%. One officer in Minnesota had his finger bitten off by a protester, egged on by elected officials characterizing our offices as Gestapo or secret police. The families of ICE personnel have been made to feel unsafe in their homes. I know this first firsthand, because my own family was targeted.
59:50 Todd Lyons:
From January 20, 2025 through January 20, 2026, ICE has conducted nearly 379,000 arrests. Among those arrests were more than 7,000 suspected gang members and over 1,400 known or suspected terrorists.
1:00:10 Todd Lyons:
The President tasked us with mass deportation, and we are fulfilling that mandate thanks to the resources provided by this Congress. We are ramping up detention capacities and removal flights daily. In the last year alone, we conducted over 475,000 removals.
1:05:05 Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY):
Director Lyons, are your officers trained regarding the difference between a protected protest and what is unlawfully impeding law enforcement?
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir, deportation officers and special agents are taught at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. They are taught in defensive tactics, personal safety, but as well as laws to include First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendment. The officers are trained before they go out into the field, and then while they’re in the field. They are specialized training with disturbance control and other special tactics.
1:05:55 Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY):
I want to focus on the training here, because with the historic investment in both ICE and CBP, there was a surge in hiring. I need to know, for these new hires, is the training different than what other agents and officers received before the hiring surge? Mr. Lyons, I’ll let you start there.
Todd Lyons:
No, sir, it’s not. The meat of the training was never removed. The timeline was we took training from five days a week, eight hours a day, to six days a week, 12 hours a day. In addition to that, training is different in the fact that before officers even go to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Academy, there’s pre-employment training, which we never had before. And on top of that, we’ve adapted our on the job training program, which is much like a city or state field training officer program that once they are removed from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Academy have graduated, before they return to their field offices, they’re assigned a field training officer, and that’s continued on after that.
1:06:55 Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY):
For ICE officers, the curriculum has stayed the same, but it’s now a quicker training. The timeline has moved up.
Todd Lyons:
That’s correct, sir.
Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY):
Okay, but the curriculum is the same?
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir.
1:09:20 Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
I’m just trying to get the number of ICE agents who have cameras on their body as of today.
Todd Lyons:
Approximately 3000, sir.
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
3000 out of how many?
Todd Lyons:
Out of approximately 13,000, sir, that are in the field.
1:11:50 Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
So if you hired somebody for ICE today, how much training would they receive before they become a full time agent?
Todd Lyons:
So for a person off the street who has never been a law enforcement officer, they’re looking at approximately three months for training, sir.
1:31:20 Todd Lyons:
You look at what ICE has done, more than 60% of every individual that is in ICE custody has a pending or a conviction on a criminal charge.
1:33:25 Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA):
One of your officers in Maine said to one of the individuals protesting, We’re going to put your face in a little database. What does that mean? Do you have a little database of Americans?
Todd Lyons:
No, sir, we don’t.
Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA):
Then what do you think your ICE agent was doing to this individual when he said those statements?
Todd Lyons:
I can’t speak for that individual, sir, but I can assure you, there is no database that’s tracking United States citizens.
2:34:30 Rep Tim Kennedy (D-NY):
Will you commit, yes or no, to immediately unmasking every agent conducting immigration enforcement and requiring them to wear standard uniforms with identifiable badges?
Todd Lyons:
No.
2:47:35 Rep. Gabe Evans (R-CO):
Director Lyons, is ICE’s priority the apprehension and removal of criminal non-citizens, rather than the broader population of illegally present individuals?
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir, ICE’s continued focus is on the criminal aliens that are in our neighborhoods.
2:50:35 Todd Lyons:
Sir, ICE officers and special agents are trained in Immigration [unintelligible], so anyone that is here legally or lawfully, or a US citizen, should not be concerned about being deported or detained. Unfortunately, many times there are individuals that are with criminal legal aliens. And sir, as you being a former law enforcement officer, you know, you arrive on a scene, you ID everyone in that case. If we’re looking for an individual, and someone is here, present in the country illegally, then we’re going to take action. We’re not going to turn blind eye no more. But someone that’s in the country lawfully should not feel scared to walk down the street.
2:55:40 Rep. Julie Johnson (D-TX):
You said that you had 379,000 arrests, but only 8,700 of them were suspected gang members or known or suspected terrorists. That’s 2%. And the problem is we can’t terrorize 98% of the people in this country that have been wrongfully detained for 2%. That’s not how the system works, and that is not okay.
2:58:00 Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA):
What are the circumstances where a US citizen might be detained, and what steps does ICE take to prevent mistakes?
Todd Lyons:
Yes, sir, I appreciate the question. Well, unfortunately, there’s a misnomer that ICE is just a civil enforcement agency, and that’s completely wrong. ICE enforces over 400 criminal statutes as well. Special agents, especially with the Homeland Security Investigations, they’re consistently out there doing human trafficking cases, drug cases, terrorism cases. We do encounter US citizens and those who do commit federal crimes are arrested, but under Title 8, no US citizen is subject to civil immigration enforcement, and that just doesn’t happen. There are multiple safeguards in that way, and if a US citizen is detained in the course of immigration investigation, they’re quickly released. We don’t take action on American citizens.
SEN MULLIN: ‘If they did their job, none of this would be taking place .’ | My View with Lara Trump
Markwayne Mullin on YouTube
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK:)
Unfortunately, a . . . deranged individual that came in to . . . cause max damage, with
a loaded pistol, with an extra mag that was completely loaded, was shot and killed. How
much more of this is going to go on before the Democrat leaders there take responsibility
for their words?
From 2023: Sen. Markwayne Mullin challenges Teamsters president to fight during hearing
CBS News on YouTube
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK:)
So, this is a time. This is a place. If you want to run your mouth, we can be two consenting adults. We can finish it here.
Sean O’Brien:
Okay, that’s fine, perfect.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK:)
You want to do it now?
Sean O’Brien:
I’d love to do it right now.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK:)
Well, stand your butt up then.
Sean O’Brien:
You stand your butt up, big guy. Is that your solution to every problem?
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT):
Oh, hold on. Stop it. Oh, no, sit down.
DHS Ad Filmed at Mount Rushmore
KOTA Territory News
November 17, 2025
Kristi Noem:
Why do I love these wide open spaces? They remind me of why our forefathers came here, not just for its beauty, but for the freedom only America provides. I’m Kristi Noem. From the cowboys who tamed the west, to the titans who built our cities, to the dreamers who chased the impossible, America has always rewarded vision and grit. Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here, but that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You cross the border illegally, we’ll find you. Break our laws, we’ll punish you. Harm American citizens, there will be consequences. But if you come here the right way, your American dream can be as big as these endless skies. From President Trump and me, welcome home.
Music
Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito
