[im3w1l]

> Google’s head of security and risk operations responded to [a message about an incident] to clarify what had happened. They noted that an “officer arrived at reception without notice” and that the agent was “not granted entry because they did not have a warrant and promptly left.”

This seems like a very reasonable way to handle it.

Edit: Disclosure: I'm not an American.

[mullingitover]

There was a recent secret internal ICE memo stating that they determined they were free to essentially engage in unconstitutional home invasions[1]. If they decided to batter down the doors at Google there is nothing stopping them.

The only thing keeping them in check is the courts, and that practically operates in geologic timeframes compared to the rate they are breaking laws.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/ice-arrests-warrants-minneapolis-...

[stopbulying]

"Immigration officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge’s warrant, memo says": https://apnews.com/article/ice-arrests-warrants-minneapolis-...

Search and Seizure > United States: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_seizure

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United...

[watwut]

> The only thing keeping them in check is the courts, and that practically operates in geologic timeframes compared to the rate they are breaking laws.

There are years of precedent and common practice that makes police and police like entities basically unreachable by law. Between qualified immunity, presumption of regularity and generally all the roadblock and convoluted technical rules supreme court placed between possible judgement and police ... courts can do only so much.

[Eridrus]

What do you think it would be reasonable for Google to do here?

Should they try to put security staff in harms way attempting to resist ICE entry?

ICE are thugs doing illegal things, but I also think that these things are for the courts to resolve, not something that should be handled with physical force.

The only other policy I can really think to have is to call the local police and tell them that ICE are executing an illegal search and hope.

[mc32]

That’s where they will use an “administrative warrant” to arrest someone with a final order of removal.

So not citizens’ houses but one where someone is in the country illegally with a final order of removal.

[pavel_lishin]

Telling the police to come back with a warrant sometimes works, and sometimes doesn't.

And these guys aren't the police.

[motbus3]

Why did he go there without a warranty in the first place? Was he following someone who entered the building? Would that be weird similar to the weird mustached guy from the 40s?

[amanaplanacanal]

The thing is, they are required to have a warrant, but I don't believe they are required to show you the warrant. In which case what exactly should they do?

[roryirvine]

It's pretty common to treat unauthorised entry attempts as a serious security incident.

The minimum follow-up actions I'd expect would be filing a police report, sending all-staff emails reminding people to be on the lookout for tailgaters, and reviewing security at reception.

If there was a specific risk of ongoing intrusion attempts, then I'd also expect legal action (eg. injunctions or restraining orders) to be taken in mitigation.

It's perfectly reasonable for staff to want to seek assurance that those sort of basic measures to ensure their safety are underway.