(NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA) — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested a New Orleans Police Department recruit who is in the United States illegally and has an active removal order, one week before graduation from the police academy, raising questions about background checks, employment eligibility, and how sanctuary policies intersect with federal enforcement.
ICE agents arrested Larry Temah, 46, a national of Cameroon, on January 28, 2026, in New Orleans, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said. DHS and ICE detailed the arrest in statements issued February 3, 2026.
Federal officials said Temah was subject to an active removal order and had been issued a firearm by the department. That allegation adds potential criminal exposure separate from immigration enforcement.
“This illegal alien from Cameroon, Larry Temah, is not only breaking the law with every step he takes in this country illegally, but the New Orleans Police Department hired him and issued him a firearm—what kind of law enforcement department gives criminal illegal aliens guns and badges?” said Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary for public affairs. She also said it is a felony for illegal aliens to possess a firearm.
New Orleans Police Department Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick said on January 28, 2026, that Temah passed the department’s background checks, including NCIC and E-Verify. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said February 4, 2026, that she spoke with Kirkpatrick and remained concerned about how someone with an active removal order could pass hiring filters.
Removal order and immigration status
A removal order is an immigration judge’s order requiring a noncitizen to leave the United States. Once final, it typically places a person at high risk of detention and removal if ICE locates them.
Temah’s removal order was issued in absentia, meaning the immigration judge entered the order when he did not appear in court. DHS said Temah failed to attend three court hearings.
In many cases, in absentia orders stem from missed hearings after notice problems, address changes, or other failures to appear. They can also follow deliberate nonappearance. Either way, the order carries the same force unless reopened or rescinded by an immigration court.
Officials said the removal order was signed December 5, 2025, after Temah had already been hired by the New Orleans Police Department in June 2025. DHS disputed the department’s account, saying he lacked valid work authorization when he applied.
DHS said Temah remains in ICE custody pending removal proceedings and has been denied a bond hearing. Bond posture in immigration detention varies by case, but denial generally means continued detention while the person seeks other court review or relief.
⚠️ Active removal order and pending removal proceedings mean detention risk and limited relief options; readers should not infer guilt beyond adjudicated facts
Key facts and timeline (interactive tool)
The timeline below summarizes key dates from the government statements and related responses. An interactive tool will present this timeline visually and allow readers to explore each entry and source in detail.
Key entries to be shown in the interactive timeline include: lawful entry to the U.S. in 2015 on a visitor visa; conditional residency through marriage in 2016; denial of a permanent residency application for fraud in 2022; hiring by NOPD in June 2025; an in absentia removal order on December 5, 2025; ICE arrest on January 28, 2026; DHS/ICE public statements on February 3, 2026; and the state response on February 4, 2026.
Immigration history and adjudication details
Temah’s immigration history, as described by DHS, began with a lawful entry in 2015 on a visitor visa. A lawful entry can later allow certain paths to stay, but it does not by itself grant long-term status.
Federal officials said he obtained conditional residency in 2016 through marriage to a U.S. citizen. Conditional permanent residence is a time-limited green card status often tied to proving a bona fide marriage over time.
A person with conditional status typically must later prove eligibility to keep permanent residence. If the government finds fraud, the consequences can be severe and may include loss of status and future eligibility barriers.
DHS said Temah’s application for permanent residency was denied in 2022 due to fraud. A fraud finding can affect later requests for immigration benefits and may limit relief in removal proceedings.
After status problems, cases often move into removal proceedings before the immigration court system. Missing hearings can lead to an in absentia removal order, which generally stands unless a judge later reopens the case.
Reopening an in absentia order, in many cases, requires showing a legal basis such as lack of notice or exceptional circumstances. That process can be hard to pursue from detention and is time-sensitive.
Employment screening and verification
Employment screening can differ sharply from immigration adjudication. Police departments and other employers typically verify identity and work eligibility using documents presented by the applicant, and may run criminal-history checks.
Kirkpatrick said the New Orleans Police Department used NCIC and E-Verify. NCIC is a law enforcement database tied to criminal justice information, while E-Verify is an employment eligibility system that checks information against federal records.
Neither tool is designed to serve as a complete, real-time confirmation of immigration court posture. An active removal order can exist even if an employer’s standard checks do not surface it.
Firearm allegation and criminal exposure
DHS said Temah was issued a service weapon despite being in the country illegally and under an active removal order. That detail drew the sharpest federal criticism.
One federal statute often cited in such cases is 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which bars firearm possession by an “alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States.” The statute is separate from immigration law and can be charged as a criminal offense independent of removal proceedings. (See: 18 U.S.C. § 922)
Criminal allegations can also affect immigration custody decisions. An arrest tied to a firearms allegation may increase detention risk and can narrow possible defenses, even before any conviction.
Sanctuary policies and detainers
DHS used the case to criticize “sanctuary” policies in New Orleans. In public debate, “sanctuary” usually refers to limits on local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, not blanket immunity from federal arrest.
ICE detainers are requests that local jails notify ICE before release, or hold a person briefly, depending on local policy and legal constraints. Jurisdictions vary in whether they honor detainers without a judicial warrant.
Federal officials said sanctuary cities “ignore ICE detainers,” framing the issue as a public-safety risk. Local leaders often respond that they follow city policy and constitutional limits, while still cooperating in other ways.
Limitations of background checks
Background checks can also create confusion. NCIC may flag warrants and criminal records, but an immigration court removal order is not the same as a criminal warrant.
E-Verify can confirm certain work authorization claims at a point in time, but it is not a direct window into immigration court dockets. That gap can matter when someone has a complex status history and later court action.
Kirkpatrick said ICE offered help after the arrest to better identify recruits with immigration issues. DHS, in turn, pointed to the case as evidence that local screening was inadequate.
Detention, bond, and legal options
For Temah, being in ICE custody pending removal generally means detention while ICE arranges travel documents and coordinates logistics for removal. Detention locations can change, and communication with family and counsel may become harder.
A denied bond hearing limits the ability to seek release while immigration litigation continues. Some people can still request court review or pursue reopening of an in absentia order, but timelines may move quickly.
Institutional and employment consequences
Institutional consequences for the New Orleans Police Department may include reviews of hiring steps, document handling, and the academy pipeline. Agencies often examine how identity, work eligibility, and disqualifying legal orders were evaluated.
Employment action and immigration outcomes can also diverge. A department can terminate employment based on policy or suitability, while the immigration court process turns on separate legal standards.
Federal statements and court orders are not the same kind of record. Press releases describe an agency’s position, while an immigration judge’s order and any criminal charging documents are the operative legal instruments.
Federal statements and sources (interactive references)
The DHS newsroom release was titled “ICE Arrests Illegal Alien One Week Before Graduation from New Orleans Police Department Academy Training, Issued Firearm,” dated February 3, 2026. ICE also pointed readers to its newsroom releases page in connection with the January 28, 2026 arrest and the February 3, 2026 statement.
An interactive references tool will provide direct links to the DHS/ICE press releases, court docket entries, and state statements so readers can inspect the primary documents and exact language used by each agency.
✅ Readers should consult official court records or government statements for precise status updates and docket information
Note and legal guidance
Note: This article discusses immigration enforcement and legal status. Information reflects official statements and court records as cited; it is not legal advice.
Readers should consult official government sources or qualified legal counsel for personalized guidance.
