logo
Immigration agents demand tenant information from landlords, stirring questions and confusion

Immigration agents demand tenant information from landlords, stirring questions and confusion

ATLANTA (AP) — Immigration authorities are demanding that landlords turn over leases, rental applications, forwarding addresses, identification cards and other information on their tenants, a sign that the Trump administration is targeting them to assist in its drive for mass deportations.
Eric Teusink, an Atlanta-area real estate attorney, said several clients recently received subpoenas asking for entire files on tenants. A rental application can include work history, marital status and family relationships.
The two-page 'information enforcement subpoena,' which Teusink shared exclusively with The Associated Press, also asks for information on other people who lived with the tenant. One, dated May 1, is signed by an officer for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ' anti-fraud unit. However, it is not signed by a judge.
It is unclear how widely the subpoenas were issued, but they could signal a new front in the administration's efforts to locate people who are in the country illegally, many of whom were required to give authorities their U.S. addresses as a condition for initially entering the country without a visa. President Donald Trump largely ended temporary status for people who were allowed in the country under his predecessor, Joe Biden.
Experts question whether landlords need to comply
Some legal experts and property managers say the demands pose serious legal questions because they are not signed by a judge and that, if landlords comply, they might risk violating the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin.
Critics also say landlords are likely to feel intimidated into complying with something that a judge hasn't ordered, all while the person whose information is being requested may never know that their private records are in the hands of immigration authorities.
'The danger here is overcompliance," said Stacy Seicshnaydre, a Tulane University law professor who studies housing law. "Just because a landlord gets a subpoena, doesn't mean it's a legitimate request.'
ICE officers have long used subpoenas signed by an agency supervisor to try to enter homes. Advocacy groups have mounted 'Know Your Rights' campaign urging people to refuse entry if they are not signed by a judge.
The subpoena reviewed by the AP is from USCIS' fraud detection and national security directorate, which, like ICE, is part of The Department of Homeland Security. Although it isn't signed by a judge, it threatens that a judge may hold a landlord in contempt of court for failure to comply.
Tricia McLaughlin, a Homeland Security spokeswoman, defended the use of subpoenas against landlords without confirming if they are being issued.
'We are not going to comment on law enforcement's tactics surrounding ongoing investigations," McLaughlin said. 'However, it is false to say that subpoenas from ICE can simply be ignored. ICE is authorized to obtain records or testimony through specific administrative subpoena authorities. Failure to comply with an ICE-issued administrative subpoena may result in serious legal penalties. The media needs to stop spreading these lies.'
These requests are new to many landlords
Teusink said many of his clients oversee multifamily properties and are used to getting subpoenas for other reasons, such as requests to hand over surveillance footage or give local police access to a property as part of an investigation. But, he said, those requests are signed by a judge.
Teusink said his clients were confused by the latest subpoenas. After consulting with immigration attorneys, he concluded that compliance is optional. Unless signed by a judge, the letters are essentially just an officer making a request.
'It seemed like they were on a fishing expedition,' Teusink said.
Boston real estate attorney Jordana Roubicek Greenman said a landlord client of his received a vague voicemail from an ICE official last month requesting information about a tenant. Other local attorneys told her that their clients had received similar messages. She told her client not to call back.
Anthony Luna, the CEO of Coastline Equity, a commercial and multifamily property management company that oversees about 1,000 units in the Los Angeles area, said property managers started contacting him a few weeks ago about concerns from tenants who heard rumors about the ICE subpoenas. Most do not plan to comply if they receive them.
'If they're going after criminals, why aren't they going through court documents?' Luna said. 'Why do they need housing provider files?'
ICE subpoenas preceded Trump's first term in office, though they saw a significant uptick under him, according to Lindsay Nash, a law professor at Yeshiva University's Cardozo School of Law in New York who has spent years tracking them. Landlords rarely got them, though. State and local police were the most common recipients.
ICE can enforce the subpoenas, but it would first have to file a lawsuit in federal court and get a judge to sign off on its enforcement — a step that would allow the subpoena's recipient to push back, Nash said. She said recipients often comply without telling the person whose records are being divulged.
"Many people see these subpoenas, think that they look official, think that some of the language in them sounds threatening, and therefore respond, even when, from what I can tell, it looks like some of these subpoenas have been overbroad,' she said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

House to vote on Trump's demand to claw back foreign aid and public broadcast funds
House to vote on Trump's demand to claw back foreign aid and public broadcast funds

Boston Globe

timea minute ago

  • Boston Globe

House to vote on Trump's demand to claw back foreign aid and public broadcast funds

Advertisement The debate on the measure laid bare a simmering fight over Congress' power of the purse. Since Trump began his second term, the White House has moved aggressively and at times unilaterally, primarily through the Department of Government Efficiency, to expand the executive branch's control over federal spending, a power the Constitution gives to the legislative branch. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Top White House officials, led by Russell Vought, the budget office director, have sought to rein in the size of the federal government, including by freezing funds appropriated by Congress. It is part of a wider campaign to claim far-reaching powers over federal spending for the president. This time, the administration went through a formal process by submitting what is known as a rescissions bill. Those measures are rare and seldom succeed, given how tightly Congress has historically guarded its power over federal spending. The last such package to be enacted was in 1999, under President Bill Clinton. Advertisement GOP leaders said the vote was a symbolic victory that underscored the Republican-held Congress' willingness to cut federal spending that it viewed as inappropriate and wasteful. 'I appreciate all the work the administration has done in identifying wasteful spending,' Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the majority leader, said in a speech before the vote. 'Now it's time for the Senate to do its part to cut some of that waste out of the budget. It's a small but important step toward fiscal sanity that we all should be able to agree is long overdue.' But the process left even some Republicans who ultimately voted for the bill uncomfortable. A number of senators said the administration had not provided details about what specific programs would be affected. 'If we find out that some of these programs that we've communicated should be out of bounds — that advisers to the president decide they are going to cut anyway,' Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is retiring, said, 'then there will be a reckoning for that.' And even as GOP senators agreed to cancel funding at the White House's request, 10 of them signed a rare public letter to Vought demanding that he reverse a decision to withhold roughly $7 billion in congressionally approved funding to their states meant to bolster educational programs including after-school and summer programs. 'The decision to withhold this funding is contrary to President Trump's goal of returning K-12 education to the states,' the Republicans wrote. To win the votes of Republican senators who initially objected, GOP leaders agreed to strip out a $400 million cut that Trump requested to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR. The White House signaled it would not contest the change. Advertisement They also shielded some funding for specific programs, including aid to Jordan and Egypt; Food for Peace, a program that provides food assistance to other countries; and some global health programs. Another holdout, Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., who had previously indicated that he would oppose the request because of the cuts to public broadcasting, decided to support the package. He said he had been assured by top Trump administration officials that they would steer unspent funds 'to continue grants to tribal radio stations without interruption' for next year. Before the vote, the head of a network of Native radio and television stations privately appealed to Rounds to oppose the package, saying the deal he had made was unworkable. 'There is currently no clear path for redirecting these funds to tribal broadcasters without significant legislative and administrative changes,' wrote Loris Taylor, president of Native Public Media. The vote incensed Democrats, who argued that Republicans were ceding Congress' constitutional powers in the name of cutting a minuscule amount of spending, just weeks after passing their marquee tax bill that would add $4 trillion to federal deficits. They warned that it could have dire consequences for future bipartisan negotiations to fund the government. Lawmakers are currently working to negotiate spending levels before a Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. 'We have never, never before seen bipartisan investments slashed through a partisan rescissions package,' said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee. 'Do not start now. Not when we are working, at this very moment, in a bipartisan way to pass our spending bills. Bipartisanship doesn't end with any one line being crossed; it erodes. It breaks down bit by bit, until one day there is nothing left.' Advertisement The vote codified a number of executive actions the administration advanced earlier this year to gut foreign aid programs, many first undertaken by DOGE. The effects on public media are yet to come. NPR and PBS would survive — only a small percentage of their funding comes from the federal government. But the cuts would force many local stations to sharply reduce their programming and operations as early as this fall. Many public broadcasters receive more than 50% of their budgets from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That means the package could be a death sentence for some stations, which have survived several attempts to choke off funding over the decades. For other broadcasters, it would mean cutting back on local programming. 'We just don't have a lot of fat to trim elsewhere,' Julie Overgaard, executive director for South Dakota Public Broadcasting, said in an interview before the vote. 'On the PBS side of things, I can't just start cherry-picking which national programs I want and only pay for those,' she said. 'So it really leaves me and many others with little choice but to look at the local programming that we self-generate.' This article originally appeared in

Scoop: GOP unveils $5 million in attack ads against Sen. Jon Ossoff
Scoop: GOP unveils $5 million in attack ads against Sen. Jon Ossoff

Axios

timea minute ago

  • Axios

Scoop: GOP unveils $5 million in attack ads against Sen. Jon Ossoff

An outside group linked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is launching a $5 million ad blitz against Sen. Jon Ossoff, the most vulnerable Democratic incumbent in the country. Why it matters: The ad campaign shows that Republicans are ready to spend big cash against Ossoff (D-Ga.), their top target in the midterm election. Zoom out: The commercials are being run by One Nation, a nonprofit group that is allied with the Senate Leadership Fund, the main Senate GOP super PAC. The ad begins running Thursday on broadcast and cable stations, and digitally, across the state. It attacks Ossoff for his opposition to the President Trump-backed "big, beautiful bill," focusing specifically on tax cuts that are included in the legislation. "Why did he do it, who knows? Ask him," one man says in the spot. Zoom in: The Senate Leadership Fund this spring ran a 7-figure ad campaign against Ossoff. But Ossoff will have plenty of resources of his own. He raked in a mammoth $10 million during the second quarter and has $15 million in cash on hand. "National Republicans are scrambling to defend their bill after facing intense backlash in Georgia for gutting Medicaid and defunding hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes," Ossoff campaign spokesperson Ellie Dougherty told Axios in a statement. "Georgians work hard to provide for their families, and they deserve a Senator who works just as hard for them," One Nation Executive Director Alex Latcham said in a statement. Republicans are headed for a competitive primary, after GOP Gov. Brian Kemp passed on a bid.

DOJ pushes for all data on noncitizens in California jails
DOJ pushes for all data on noncitizens in California jails

Axios

timea minute ago

  • Axios

DOJ pushes for all data on noncitizens in California jails

The Department of Justice requested multiple California counties on Thursday for data about every noncitizen inmate being held in the state's jails. Why it matters: The request is a further escalation of the Trump's administration's crackdown on sanctuary cities in California. There's no universal definition of a sanctuary city, but local California law enforcement typically does not help federal officers enforce civil immigration laws except for cases involving criminal offenses. Driving the news: The DOJ said in a press release it hopes California sheriffs will voluntarily produce the noncitizens information, but the department will "pursue all available means of obtaining the data, including through subpoenas or other compulsory process," if the state doesn't comply. "Removing criminal illegal aliens is this Administration's highest priority," Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. "I look forward to cooperating with California's county sheriffs to accomplish our shared duty of keeping Californians and all Americans safe and secure," she added. Catch up quick: The request came amid the administration's ramped up deportation operation in Los Angeles, which included deploying over 2,000 National Guard troops to the city, against California Gov. Gavin Newsom's wishes. The DOJ sued the city of Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass and the city council over its sanctuary city laws last month, calling them " illegal" and part of the reason for the widespread immigration protests and unrest in the city during the prior weeks. Flashback: The Department of Homeland Security released a public list of more than 500 "sanctuary jurisdictions" in May, in an attempt to ramp up pressure on the leaders of those cities. After some cities on the list criticized the data, including some Trump-friendly jurisdictions without sanctuary policies on the books, the administration deleted the page. Zoom out: Bondi said on Fox News Thursday while visiting the infamous Alcatraz Island in California that the facility could hold undocumented immigrants.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store