DOJ Rejects Claim It Broke Judge's Rules Searching Rep. Omar's Home

Lawyers for Rep. Ilhan Omar accused the Justice Department this past week of disregarding a federal magistrate judge's limits on the Oct. 12 search of her Washington home, escalating a legal and political fight over an investigation that could end with the Minnesota Democrat's citizenship being revoked three weeks before she stands for re-election.

The dispute centers on a search warrant executed by agents of Homeland Security Investigations, the criminal-enforcement arm of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, at Omar's home in Northeast Washington. In an Oct. 16 letter to prosecutors, her attorneys, Amy Jeffress and Joshua Matz, wrote that investigators ignored protocols a magistrate judge had required to protect Omar's rights as a sitting member of Congress, and demanded the immediate return of everything seized. The Justice Department rejected the accusation outright.

A Search, and a Fight Over Its Rules

According to the attorneys' letter, reported in detail by CBS News, a magistrate judge had conditioned approval of the warrant on specific safeguards: agents were to notify both Omar and the House Office of General Counsel when the search began, and to provide her and her lawyers a copy of the warrant at the outset, before reviewing any material that might touch her legislative work. Those conditions trace to constitutional protections for lawmakers' records that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit laid out in its 2007 ruling on the FBI's raid of Rep. William Jefferson's congressional office, which held that the executive branch cannot comb through a lawmaker's seized materials before the lawmaker has a chance to screen them for legislative privilege.

Omar's lawyers say none of that happened. They wrote that agents did not notify the House counsel's office, kept Omar from reaching her own lawyer for more than an hour after agents arrived, and never handed over a copy of the warrant as required. "This search was neither justified nor lawful," the letter said, according to an Associated Press account, which also reported that the letter called the timing, less than a month before the Nov. 3 midterms, evidence of political motivation.

A Justice Department spokesperson disputed the account, calling the letter "riddled with false allegations and inaccuracies" and saying the department's lawyers and law-enforcement partners "complied with all court orders and legal obligations, as they always do." The spokesperson also suggested that releasing the letter to reporters amounted to "a publicity play" rather than a good-faith legal complaint.

What Investigators Seized, and What They're After

Agents took Omar's cellphone, her passport, personal notebooks and computers during the roughly two-hour search, according to people familiar with the matter cited across multiple news accounts. In the days before and after the search, prosecutors issued more than a dozen grand jury subpoenas, including to some of Omar's relatives.

The warrant itself reportedly listed potential violations involving immigration fraud, false statements in immigration proceedings and conspiracy. At issue, according to reporting that cites people familiar with the investigation, is whether Omar or her late father misrepresented her age — saying she was 17 rather than 18 — when the family, having fled Somalia, obtained citizenship for her in 2000. The Wall Street Journal reported on Oct. 14 that the Trump administration's ultimate aim is to build a denaturalization case against Omar that could lead to her deportation, a characterization relayed by multiple outlets citing the Journal's sourcing. Omar's office has called the premise baseless, and a similar inquiry opened during the Biden administration reportedly closed without charges for lack of evidence.

Separately, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, led by Jeanine Pirro, has said it is investigating Omar's congressional financial disclosures, after a 2024 filing showed the reported value of two businesses tied to her husband, Tim Mynett, jumping into the tens of millions of dollars before Omar's office amended the filing this spring, attributing the swing to an error that conflated the businesses' total equity with Mynett's roughly one-third ownership stake. Officials have not said whether that inquiry is connected to the immigration investigation.

Escalating Statements From Both Sides

No charges have been filed against Omar, who has represented Minnesota's 5th District, anchored in Minneapolis, since 2019 and faces voters again on Nov. 3. She has called the investigation "an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement" and said she "will not be silenced," a position her congressional office echoed in a statement the day of the search describing it as "an outrageous abuse of power."

House Democratic leaders, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Whip Katherine Clark and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, called the search "egregious" and "deeply disturbing" in a joint statement, noting it came inside the 30 days before a federal election — a period in which Justice Department guidance has traditionally discouraged overt investigative steps against candidates. President Trump told reporters he had "nothing to do with" the search, calling it a matter for the department while separately describing Omar as "totally crooked."

The administration's own officials have been more expansive. Border czar Tom Homan said on Fox News' "The Big Weekend Show" that he had been told investigators "have a strong case," and that denaturalization "could happen" if the evidence supports it, adding that Omar would be "held to the same standards" as anyone else. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, who was confirmed by the Senate in March, has said multiple warrants were served the same day as the search and rejected any suggestion the case is politically driven.

The dispute drew in a former president this weekend. Barack Obama issued a statement condemning the administration's handling of the case as the search's one-week anniversary approached.

"The fact that any president, or any administration, is willing to engage in such transparent efforts to intimidate someone should outrage all Americans, regardless of how they feel about Congresswoman Omar's political views," Obama said in the statement.

What Comes Next

For now, the fight is proceeding on two tracks. One runs through the grand jury, where prosecutors continue gathering testimony and records from Omar's relatives toward a possible indictment or a denaturalization referral — a civil process, separate from any criminal charge, that would require the government to prove in federal court that citizenship was obtained through fraud or misrepresentation. The other runs through the dispute over the search itself: Omar's attorneys have asked prosecutors to return the seized property and preserve any video or audio recorded during the search, setting up a fight that could land before the same magistrate judge who set the original conditions, and potentially before the district court if either side seeks to compel action.

Omar has given no indication she intends to leave the race for a fifth term. Her district has backed her by wide margins in past elections, and Democratic leaders have framed the investigation as a liability for Republicans rather than for her, a dynamic likely to keep the case in the campaign's foreground through Election Day. Prosecutors have not said when, or whether, they expect to seek charges or file a denaturalization case, and the Justice Department has not disclosed a timeline for responding to Omar's lawyers' demands.