ICE Agents Blocked From Arresting Sex Offender On Campus

Police U.S. Border Patrol uniform close-up.

A Minnesota university is under fire after an administrator allegedly blocked ICE from removing a registered sex offender who shouldn’t have been on American streets in the first place.

Story Snapshot

DHS says an Augsburg University administrator and campus security tried to block ICE from taking a criminal illegal alien sex offender into custody.
The suspect, an Augsburg student, is a removable non-citizen, registered sex offender, and prior DWI arrestee.
University officials accuse ICE of acting without a warrant and using masked agents with weapons drawn on campus.
The clash highlights the growing divide between campus “sanctuary” culture and federal law enforcement.

Campus Confrontation Over ICE Arrest Of Sex Offender Student

On December 6, 2025, federal immigration officers tracked Augsburg University student Jesus Saucedo‑Portillo to the Minneapolis campus and moved in as he approached his vehicle. According to the Department of Homeland Security, agents were executing an arrest on a removable non‑citizen who is a registered sex offender with a previous DWI arrest. As officers attempted to leave with their detainee, a university administrator and campus security allegedly stepped in front of the ICE vehicle, physically blocking its exit.

DHS says agents warned that continuing to obstruct the vehicle would constitute obstruction of justice. Officers told campus officials that federal immigration law and a lawful warrant supersede any internal university policy. After verbal warnings, ICE reports using the minimum force necessary to complete the arrest and leave campus. Minneapolis police were later called by witnesses reporting people with guns on campus, but by the time local officers arrived, federal agents had already departed the scene.

University Claims Of “Unacceptable” Tactics And Fear On Campus

Augsburg University officials have publicly painted a very different picture of the same afternoon. In their account, ICE agents in an unmarked vehicle followed Saucedo‑Portillo onto campus, confronted him without showing a warrant, and wore masks that obscured their identities. The university alleges agents detained the student, then aimed weapons at witnesses, including students and staff, while others watched from dorm windows, creating what leaders later called a profoundly disturbing atmosphere of fear.

Campus leaders insist their priority was student safety and adherence to institutional policies that typically require judicial warrants for law enforcement actions on university grounds. They argue that heavily armed federal agents, operating from an unmarked car and allegedly training weapons on bystanders, violated those norms and escalated tensions. Their narrative has been embraced by activists who portray the incident as an example of immigration overreach that chills immigrant and refugee students already anxious about federal enforcement operations in Minnesota.

Law, Order, And The Limits Of “Sanctuary” On Campus

For many conservatives, the most troubling piece of this story is not ICE’s presence, but a taxpayer‑supported institution apparently choosing to side with a criminal illegal alien over the rule of law. DHS emphasizes that Saucedo‑Portillo was not some random target; he was a removable non‑citizen with a sex‑offense registration and a prior DWI arrest, precisely the type of offender most Americans expect immigration authorities to prioritize. Federal officials argue that when campus staff stepped in front of a moving law‑enforcement vehicle, they crossed from campus advocacy into potential obstruction.

This confrontation did not occur in a vacuum. Minnesota has been at the center of an intensified enforcement push, including operations in the Minneapolis area that focus on certain immigrant groups and criminal cases. As arrests increase, progressive critics amplify claims of overreach, while federal officials stress that they are removing dangerous individuals. The Augsburg clash exposes how far parts of higher education will go to signal resistance, even when the individual at issue is a registered sex offender, not a law‑abiding honors student caught up in bureaucratic red tape.

What This Means For Parents, Taxpayers, And Constitutional Governance

Parents who send their children to college reasonably expect administrators to cooperate with law enforcement when a known sexual predator is being taken off campus. Yet this incident suggests that, at least at Augsburg, ideological hostility toward immigration enforcement may outweigh common‑sense safety concerns. If a university is willing to physically impede a federal arrest to protect a non‑citizen sex offender, families must ask how seriously that institution takes its duty to safeguard students, especially young women, from predators in their midst.

Minnesota college administrator accused of impeding ICE arrest to protect student sexual predator https://t.co/9rwiReq57G

— Off The Press (@OffThePress1) December 10, 2025

For constitutional conservatives, the core issue is whether local actors can veto federal law whenever it clashes with their political sensibilities. Federal immigration authority exists to protect citizens from precisely the risks posed by repeat criminal offenders who lack any right to remain in the country. When campus “sanctuary” culture attempts to override that authority, it undermines equal protection under the law and signals to criminal aliens that sympathetic institutions may shield them from consequences.