Important US Code and Constitutional Amendments quoted have special meaning in this post.

 

Hiding behind the Fourth Amendment

Leftists can’t ‘plead the Fourth’ to hide illegal aliens in your home.

Matthew G. Andersson | February 3, 2026 www.americanthinker.com

A group of legal professionals write, “We Were Top Homeland Security Lawyers.  You Can’t Wish Away the Fourth Amendment” and argue in the New York Times that illegal foreign border invaders, and the homeowners sheltering them, are somehow protected by the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment concerning unreasonable search and seizure.

In English common law, every man’s home may indeed be his castle, but it is not his criminal safe house, gang hideout, or alien sanctuary.  Under the same English law, the notable exception to what became the Fourth Amendment was when law enforcement or citizens were pursuing a known felon.

The Fourth Amendment was created for two purposes. One was to assert a citizen private property exclusion from government or other military occupation, turning your home, against your will and without appeal, into an army barracks for transient soldiers.  The amendment also asserts a citizen privilege over private papers and records, among other property.

Like the entire U.S. Constitution, it is a contract for the People, where “people” are citizens.  It was never intended to be a way to block authority from removing mass illegal border invaders or foreign criminals.  Neither is the Fourth Amendment a blanket right extended under vague human rights ideology.

By deceptively arguing for alien Fourth Amendment protection, the partisan lawyers are opening up a fascinating issue: What criminal laws apply to U.S. citizens who illegally harbor illegal aliens?

More than harboring illegals, this is merely part of a long line of prior criminal acts.  It is the last line of explicit criminal planning that began with illegally opening the southern border under the Biden administration; inducing alien-smuggling and human-trafficking; standing down border and police enforcement; illegally transporting migrants by private chartered jet into dozens of U.S. cities; providing unauthorized federal disbursements including credit cards, cell phones, driver’s licenses, and commandeered hotel housing; illegally facilitating university asylum and free legal defense and even voting privileges; using illegals as political bait against ICE to provoke riots and protests, and conspiring with MSM to incite dangerous public protest ideology, social division and violence; and finally invoking a fraudulent Fourth Amendment right by inserting them in residential homes.

There is an interesting US Code that may apply: 1907.Title 8, USC 1324(a) Offenses, which  “prohibits alien smuggling, domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts.  Subsection 1324(a)(2) prohibits bringing or attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States in any manner whatsoever, even at a designated port of entry.”

By this reading, it appears that ICE and other federal law enforcement should not only directly extract illegal migrants who are being concealed inside private homes, but should also arrest and remove the homeowners who are aiding and abetting the entire DNC illegal migrant program.  It amounts to not only criminal conspiracy, but the settled law on vicarious liability.

The NYT lawyers apparently overlook what happens when a person recklessly harbors an illegal alien and criminal: they create a relationship with that alien that makes them an agent, and therefore invokes what is known in law as respondeat superior (“let the master answer”).  This puts the homeowner under strict liability. 

But it does more: It draws citizens into the entire criminal web of DNC border crime.  How many homeowners have been advised of their rights before they assign their property to a political party criminal program?

Perhaps the “top” lawyers who write in the NYT, absurdly arguing Fourth Amendment privilege for harbored illegal aliens, should instead advise U.S. citizens of the relevant U.S. Code against such criminal agency.  In that case, it is the Sixth Amendment that can’t be wished away.