There is a lot of tension between American citizens and ICE agents in America right now, due to the deporting of around 350,000 people during the 2025 year. Clips of arrests, breaking into homes, and random stops are surfacing all over the internet, with many people claiming that these actions are “unlawful”. Well, what power do ICE agents really have legally? Let’s break it down.
Legal Authority of ICE Agents
ICE agents’ powers come mainy from federal immigration law (Title 8 of the US Code) and federal criminal law (Title 18 of the US Code). Under these laws, ICE agents are allowed to enforce immigration regulations, investigate immigration-related crimes, and detain individuals who are suspected of violating these laws. They have the authority to :
- Question individuals about their immigration status, given that they have some sort of reasonable suspicion.
- Arrest individuals that are illegally living in the U.S. or violated immigration conditions.
- Detain and deport people who are found to be removable under immigration law.
- Conduct raids and investigations related to illegal entry.
- Enter non-public areas of workplaces or homes with a warrant.
However, they do not have the authority to :
- Force entry into a home without a judicial warrant or consent (Fourth Amendment).
- Deport people instantly without due process (immigration court) (Fifth Amendment).
- Detain someone purely based on race, religion, or ethnicity (Fourth/Fifth Amendment).
Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case
Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran national who came to the United States in 2011 in order to escape gang threats in El Savador. In 2019, he was granted withholding of removal—protections from deportation under U.S. immigration law when a person shows that their life or freedom would be threatened—by an immigration judge. The withholding order became final, and thus he had a legal obligation to remain in the United States.
Around March 12-15 of 2025, ICE agents—claiming Garcia was a member of MS-13–arrested him and he was forcibly deported to El Salvador. He was detained in CECOT, a Salvadoran prison confinement center. He was removed, despite the 2019 withholding of removal order.
In Maryland, Garcia’s wife filed a lawsuit, seeking his return to the U.S. Judge Paula Xinis, a judge of the Maryland District Court, ordered that the U.S. government facilitates his return. The government attempted to dismiss the lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that U.S. courts lose jurisdiction once someone has been removed.
On April 10, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that Abrego Garcia must be returned. Garcia was in fact returned to the U.S. on June 6, 2025, immediately indicted (accused) for human-smuggling and transporting undocumented migrants. He pleaded not guilty, and his criminal trial is scheduled for January 27th, 2026.
Strengths in Garcia’s Case
- Lack of direct evidence : There is no physical evidence, like surveillance footage or contraband, that links Garcia to human smuggling activities. The allegations are mainly based according to witness testimony and circumstantial evidence (inferences).
- Cooperating witnesses : The prosecution’s case relies heavily on testimony from individuals who have criminal backgrounds/pending immigration issues. Jose Ramon Hernandez-Reyes, a key witness, has been granted limited immunity and is currently serving time for re-entry offenses. The defense may question this witness’s credibility due to these incentives.
- Pretrial Motions : Garcia’s legal team is considering filing pretrial motions to suppress evidence that was obtained from a 2022 traffic stop, arguing that the stop lacked probable cause and violated his rights. If ruled in their favor, this motion could significantly weaken the prosecution’s case.
Weaknesses in Garcia’s Case
- Monetary motives : Witnesses have testified that Garcia earned up to $1500 per trip and conducted 1-2 trips a week, potentially totaling up to over $100,000 annually. These allegations suggest a strong financial motive for his involvement in smuggling operations.
- Vehicle Ownership : During the 2022 traffic stop, Garcia was driving a vehicle owned by a convicted human smuggler, linking Garcia to the smuggling activities.
- MS-13 Allegations : The prosecution’s case includes references to his alleged ties to MS-13 (an international criminal gang), which could influence the jury’s perception.
All in all, this case exemplifies the violation of Abrego Garcia’s immigration rights, through his forced deportation by ICE agents. Although his recent convictions were lawful, his removal in March, 2025 was not, hence the mass controversy of the public. This case caused an uproar among platforms like social media—even being debated numerous times by Charlie Kirk—making it a high profile case. This popularity could make it difficult for the courts to find unbiased jurors, but lawyers could strategically use the media to influence court proceedings in their favor.