A US judge ordered the release of five-year-old Liam Ramos and his father, condemning their ICE detention as cruel and driven by deportation quotas.
 |
| The court order followed national backlash after the preschooler and his father were transferred from Minneapolis to a Texas immigration facility. |
MINNEAPOLIS, UNITED STATES.— A
federal judge has ordered the release of a five-year-old boy and his father
after their detention by immigration authorities sparked national outrage. The
ruling sharply criticized the government’s conduct, raising broader questions
about immigration enforcement practices involving children. The case has
intensified scrutiny of federal operations in Minneapolis and beyond.
A detention that triggered
national attention
The case centers on Liam
Conejo Ramos, a five-year-old who was detained alongside his father after
immigration agents approached them outside their home in Minneapolis. Images
released by Columbia Heights Public Schools showed the child wearing a blue
bunny-shaped hat and carrying a Spider-Man backpack, visuals that quickly
circulated nationwide and galvanized public concern.
According to court filings, Liam
and his father were transferred hundreds of miles away to an immigration
detention center in San Antonio, Texas. Advocacy groups and local officials argued
that the child’s detention was unnecessary and traumatic, particularly given
his age and school enrollment. While immigration authorities maintained the
operation was focused on the father, the presence of a young child in custody
became the defining issue of the case.
The episode added to a growing
list of enforcement actions that critics say blur the line between lawful
immigration control and punitive measures affecting minors.
The judge’s sharply worded ruling
US District Judge Fred Biery,
an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, issued an emergency order
requiring federal officials to release both father and son by 3 February. In
his written opinion, the judge used unusually strong language, condemning what
he described as a system driven by deportation quotas rather than humane
judgment.
Biery wrote that the case stemmed
from an “ill-conceived and incompetently implemented” enforcement effort,
emphasizing that immigration policy should not result in the traumatization of
children. He further stated that deportations should proceed in an “orderly and
humane” manner consistent with constitutional values.
In a striking move, the judge
included the widely circulated photograph of Liam in his ruling, underscoring
the human impact of the government’s actions rather than treating the case as
an abstract legal dispute.
Government response and official
explanations
Federal immigration officials
have said they did not “target a child,” asserting that the operation was aimed
at Liam’s father, Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias, whom they described as
an undocumented immigrant. Officials also claimed the father “abandoned” the
child when agents approached, a characterization disputed by the family’s legal
team.
The Department of Homeland
Security has been contacted for comment following the ruling, but no
detailed public response had been issued at the time of publication. Past
statements from immigration authorities emphasize that enforcement operations
are conducted in accordance with federal law, though critics argue that
internal guidelines offer insufficient protection for children caught in such
actions.
The case highlights the
persistent gap between official policy language and the lived experiences of
families subject to immigration enforcement.
The family’s immigration status
and legal claims
According to the family’s
attorney, Marc Prokosch, Liam and his father arrived in the United
States from Ecuador in 2024 seeking asylum. Prokosch stated that they had been
complying with required immigration procedures and had no criminal history.
Legal experts note that asylum
seekers, particularly families with young children, are often granted
alternatives to detention while their cases proceed. The decision to hold a
preschool-aged child in a secure facility, even temporarily, is viewed by many
advocates as an extreme measure.
Prokosch argued that the
detention violated both the spirit and intent of US immigration law, which
places special emphasis on the welfare of minors.
Operation Metro Surge and
enforcement escalation
The detention occurred amid a
broader enforcement push in Minneapolis known as Operation Metro Surge,
an initiative launched under President Donald Trump to increase
immigration arrests in urban areas. Federal officials have described the
operation as a response to undocumented migration, while local leaders say it
has sown fear in immigrant communities.
In recent weeks, the initiative
has drawn criticism following fatal shootings of two US citizens by federal
agents during enforcement actions, intensifying demands for federal oversight.
Trump administration officials have suggested that some federal forces may be
withdrawn from the state in response to the backlash, though no formal rollback
has been announced.
The Ramos case has become a focal
point in debates over whether such operations adequately balance enforcement
goals with public safety and civil rights.
A parallel court decision
underscores legal tension
On the same day as Biery’s
ruling, another federal judge denied a state government request to block the
deployment of thousands of immigration agents in Minneapolis. The judge
concluded that the state had not demonstrated that the federal activity was
unlawful, highlighting the complex legal landscape surrounding immigration
enforcement.
Taken together, the two decisions
illustrate a judiciary grappling with the limits of executive authority. While
courts have shown reluctance to broadly restrain federal enforcement powers,
individual cases—especially those involving children—are prompting closer
scrutiny.
Legal analysts say this dual
approach reflects longstanding tensions between federal supremacy in
immigration matters and constitutional protections for individuals.
Broader implications for child
detention policy
The release order for Liam Ramos
and his father may not immediately alter national policy, but it adds to
mounting pressure on federal agencies to reconsider practices involving minors.
Child welfare advocates argue that even short periods of detention can have
lasting psychological effects, particularly on very young children.
Judge Biery’s language is likely
to be cited in future legal challenges, especially those questioning the
proportionality and necessity of detaining children during immigration
operations. While the ruling is limited to this specific case, it sends a
broader signal about judicial willingness to intervene when enforcement actions
are perceived as excessively harsh.
Whether this case leads to
systemic change remains uncertain, but it has undeniably intensified the
national conversation.
By Sofia Martinez | CRNTimes.com |
Minneapolis
January 31, 2026, 10:45 PM