World January 31, 2026

Federal Judge Orders Release of Father and 5-Year-Old Detained in Minnesota Immigration Sweep

Judge scolds enforcement practices and administrative warrants after high-profile detention of a young child in a Minneapolis suburb

By Maya Rios
Federal Judge Orders Release of Father and 5-Year-Old Detained in Minnesota Immigration Sweep

A federal judge has ordered the release of Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son, Liam Conejo Ramos, who were detained by immigration officers during a recent enforcement action in a Minneapolis suburb. The boy, photographed outside his home wearing a blue bunny hat as federal agents stood nearby, was among four students taken into custody. In a sharply worded ruling the judge criticized government deportation quotas and the use of administrative warrants.

Key Points

  • A federal judge ordered the release of Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son, Liam Conejo Ramos, after their detention during an immigration enforcement action in a Minneapolis suburb. Sectors impacted: immigration enforcement, legal services.
  • Judge Fred Biery criticized government pursuit of daily deportation quotas and the use of administrative warrants, emphasizing constitutional requirements for judicial probable cause. Sectors impacted: judiciary, immigration policy.
  • The boy was one of four students detained in the action; school officials reported that two 17-year-olds and a 10-year-old also were taken into custody. Sectors impacted: education, child welfare.

On Jan. 31 a federal judge directed that Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son, Liam Conejo Ramos, be released after immigration officers detained them during an enforcement action in a Minneapolis suburb.

The child, described as Ecuadorean, was photographed outside his residence wearing a blue bunny hat while federal agents stood nearby. That image circulated widely online. According to the Columbia Heights Public School District, Liam was one of four students detained earlier in the month.

In a three-page order, U.S. District Judge Fred Biery sharply criticized what he described as an enforcement approach driven by daily deportation quotas. "The case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatizing children," he wrote.

The judge noted that the father and son had entered the United States legally as asylum applicants and that they were transferred to a family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, the pair's attorney, Marc Prokosch, had previously said. Prokosch and the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately return requests for comment.

Judge Biery, who was appointed by then-President Bill Clinton, invoked constitutional concerns in his ruling. He cited the requirement that an arrest warrant be supported by a judge's finding of probable cause and criticized the use of so-called "administrative warrants" issued by immigration officials, calling that practice "the fox guarding the henhouse."

In the same opinion the judge drew sharp comparisons between the administration's tactics and language from the U.S. Declaration of Independence, referencing actions described there including sending "Swarms of Officers to harass our People," exciting "domestic Insurrection among us" and "quartering large Bodies of Armed Troops among us." He characterized some actors involved as driven by a "perfidious lust for unbridled power" and said their behavior was "bereft of human decency," adding, "And the rule of law be damned."

School officials said the enforcement action involved other young people as well. Columbia Heights district Superintendent Zena Stenvik said that armed and masked officers detained two 17-year-olds and a 10-year-old in addition to Liam.

The judge's order emphasized that while petitioners may ultimately return to their home country, whether involuntarily or by self-deportation, such outcomes should proceed through "a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place." The ruling framed the court's intervention as a response to what the judge described as an immigration system with arcane procedures that can produce harsh results for families.


Context and next steps

The order requires the release of the father and son from federal custody. The court document focused on procedural and constitutional issues tied to enforcement mechanics rather than predicting ultimate immigration outcomes for the family. The limited public record available shows that the detained family were processed as asylum applicants and moved to a federal family detention facility prior to the judge's ruling.

Risks

  • Ongoing use of administrative warrants for immigration enforcement may prompt further legal challenges and scrutiny of enforcement procedures, affecting the legal and federal enforcement sectors.
  • Enforcement actions that result in children being detained risk public outcry and reputational issues for agencies involved, which could influence policy and resource allocation within immigration and social services sectors.
  • Uncertainty around individual immigration outcomes remains; while the court ordered release, the ruling notes petitioners may still return to their home country involuntarily or by self-deportation, leaving future legal status unresolved and impacting immigration casework.

More from World

Justice Department Files Reopen Network of Ties Between Jeffrey Epstein and Prominent Figures Feb 2, 2026 Trump’s Kennedy Center Renovation Joins Wide-Ranging Building Agenda Transforming Washington Feb 2, 2026 California Physician Faces First Private Suit Under Texas Abortion Drug Ban Feb 2, 2026 Venezuela’s Interim President Meets U.S. Envoy as Bilateral Ties Edge Forward Feb 2, 2026 DHS to Equip Every Minneapolis Field Officer with Body Cameras, Plans Nationwide Rollout as Funds Allow Feb 2, 2026