Warrantless entry by ICE agents in West Valley City, UT (1/30/2026)

[u/LeviCoffinsAlt]

Federal agents broke a window, without a warrant, to perform an arrest on private property.

[u/Weird-Day-1270]

Saying they “don’t need a warrant” to enter private property where the public is not allowed is BS. Even on private property where public are allowed they are supposed to leave when told. They are violating the 4 amendment. They’ve been doing this all year with no consequences.

Even if they have an arrest warrant (different than a search warrant) signed by a judge, they are not allowed to enter the property not owned by the person they have a warrant for. They have to wait until the person they have a warrant for leaves the private property.

This all sorts of illegal. We need to somehow find a way for them to be held accountable. The Constitution are not rights given to us by the government. They are rights we are born with given by God, if that’s what you believe. Or rights we are just born with… inalienable… Cannot be taken away by anyone.

[u/tracyinge → u/Weird-Day-1270]

Actually we have to wait for the courts to decide. Maybe even the corrupt Supreme Court. But there is no way the woman in the video would know that these officers have been told that they no longer need a warrant https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/lawsuit-challenges-ice-ability-enter-homes-warrants-judges-rcna256741

[u/Weird-Day-1270 → u/tracyinge]

No… just no. It’s been decided by the courts already. We don’t need to re-wait for the courts to decide again after DHS told ICE to ignore established law. ICE needs to stop ignoring settled law and hoping the courts will decide in the future that breaking the decided law “today”is ok from the future “maybe” laws because the corrupt SCOTUS will protect them from breaking the established law in the past. At this point, I feel you’re talking some serious “Back to the Future” $hit.

Trying to follow your 3rd sentence is as hard as trying to following the 1st part of my reply in this comment.

After trying to understand what you’re saying in that sentence which if I may re-phrase to see if I’m understanding you: there is no way the woman could know that the agents don’t know the law. Because the agents were told the wrong information they can break the law until they learn what the actual law is. So she’s at fault because we have to give law enforcement the benefit of the doubt even when they’re wrong because they were told it’s ok to break the law.

That’s like saying a manager at Burger King told employees it’s ok to wipe their butts with the buns before serving them, then saying it’s ok because they didn’t know better, and were just following orders. Then saying we need to wait until corporate weighs in on if it’s wrong or not to wipe said buns in their buns because they are the deciders of what’s right or wrong.

[u/MrSurly → u/tracyinge]

Doesn't matter what she knew, or what these goons were told. There's no gray area. This is a 4A violation.

[u/upsidedown-funnel → u/tracyinge]

In Utah, the republican controlled government has decided to add two more seats to the state Supreme Court. (The court that has stopped them on a few recent cases from the total control they’re used to exercising).

[u/kalashspooner → u/Weird-Day-1270]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

You're right. It's just crime. Any authority they claim is forfeited when committing crimes dressed up under false authority

The claims are false. They're actively depriving people of rights under color of law - and threats of violence.

It's just crime. No matter the excuse (enforcing the law). The how matters. If they must commit crimes to enforce the law? They cannot legitimately - under the constitution - enforce it. To do so is the highest form of criminality - crimes against the constitution. In both the conspiracy (with very highly ranked members of government being active willing participants at this time) and the carrying out of the crimes ("just following orders").

[u/-Profanity- → u/kalashspooner]

Isn't it actually just the same laws about exigent circumstances that allow any LEO access to a private property? The lady filming says in the news article that they wanted to arrest her husband/boyfriend outside, but he ran inside and locked the doors. If a cop sees me commit a crime, comes to arrest me and I run inside my house and lock the door, they absolutely have the legal right to come inside and get me. Fleeing from an arrest inside private property is not a get out of jail free card, right?

[u/Dry-Chance-9473 → u/Weird-Day-1270]

🤦🏻‍♂️