Federal Judge Demands Release of Five-Year-Old Detained in Minneapolis ICE Operation
A United States federal judge has issued a direct order for the immediate release of a five-year-old boy and his father, who were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers during a controversial raid in Minnesota. The ruling represents a significant judicial rebuke of current immigration enforcement tactics under the Trump administration.
Traumatic Driveway Detention After Preschool
Liam Conejo Ramos, aged just five, was taken into custody alongside his father, Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias, in their Minneapolis driveway on January 20th. The detention occurred moments after the young boy had returned home from a regular day at preschool. A photograph capturing Liam wearing a bunny hat and Spider-Man backpack while surrounded by ICE agents quickly circulated online, generating widespread public outrage and drawing attention to the case.
Following their initial detention in Minnesota, Liam and his father were transported over one thousand miles from their home to a detention facility in Texas. This relocation has compounded the family's distress and separation from their community support networks.
Judicial Condemnation of Immigration Quotas
US District Judge Fred Biery, who presides in San Antonio and was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, delivered a strongly worded ruling ordering the pair's release by Tuesday. Judge Biery was explicitly critical of President Donald Trump's immigration enforcement strategies, stating that "the case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatising children."
The government maintains that Conejo Arias, an Ecuadorian national, entered the United States illegally in December 2024. However, the family's legal representation asserts he has a pending asylum claim that legally permits him to remain in the country while his case is processed.
Allegations of Using Child as 'Bait' in Enforcement Operation
Local school officials and neighbours have made serious allegations that ICE officers used the young boy as "bait" to gain access to his parents. They claim agents instructed Liam to knock on his own door so his mother would answer, potentially circumventing standard protocol. It is generally understood that ICE agents cannot legally enter a private residence without a warrant signed by a judge, leading immigrant advocacy groups to consistently advise individuals not to open doors to agents unless such documentation is presented.
The Department of Homeland Security has vehemently denied these allegations, with spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin calling suggestions that officers used the child as bait an "abject lie." DHS contends that the father fled on foot, leaving Liam in a running vehicle, and that an officer remained with the child for safety reasons during the apprehension.
Wider Context of Unrest and Protest in Minneapolis
This case has intensified existing tensions in Minneapolis, where ICE's increased enforcement activities have sparked sustained mass protests. According to Zena Stenvik, superintendent of Columbia Heights Public Schools, Liam was one of four students detained in the district on January 20th, with masked and armed officers also taking two seventeen-year-olds and a ten-year-old into custody.
Community unrest has deepened following the federal government's deployment of two thousand ICE agents to the city at the start of the year. The situation has been further inflamed by recent deadly shootings involving a federal officer, which claimed the lives of poet Renee Good and ICU nurse Alex Pretti.
Protests have been building outside the family detention centre in Texas, with Texas Representatives Joaquin Castro and Jasmine Crockett visiting the detained father and son. They reported that Conejo Arias expressed concern that Liam was tired and not eating well while in custody.
The judge's ruling highlights the ongoing national debate over immigration enforcement methods, particularly regarding the treatment of families and children, and sets a precedent for how similar cases might be handled by the judiciary moving forward.
