(DES MOINES, IOWA) — Ian Andre Roberts, the former Des Moines Public Schools superintendent, is expected to plead guilty to two federal charges—false claim of U.S. citizenship and unlawful possession of firearms by an illegal alien—highlighting gaps in vetting and the intertwined paths of immigration enforcement and criminal law.
Roberts’ expected plea in federal court follows a case that drew national attention after ICE alleged he lacked lawful work eligibility, possessed firearms, and made citizenship representations tied to public employment.
A plea hearing typically resolves guilt but not punishment. Sentencing usually comes later, after a presentence investigation and briefing that can shape the judge’s final decision.
Federal agencies framed the case as an enforcement priority involving public trust. “Roberts’ rap sheet and immigration history reveal a long record of criminal conduct in the United States,” ICE said in an October 3, 2025, press release. “He should never have been serving in a role overseeing children in Iowa’s largest school district.”
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said Roberts had a “wrap sheet with multiple weapons and drug trafficking charges” and criticized screening that allowed him to work in public education.
Des Moines Public Schools leaders said the district did not know of immigration problems before the allegations became public. “I want to be clear, no one here was aware of any citizenship or immigration issues that Dr. Roberts may have been facing,” board President Jackie Norris said on September 30, 2025.
Timeline of events
Below is a timeline of key events that federal prosecutors and immigration authorities often treat as legally meaningful markers, including alleged status changes, a removal order, arrest activity, and a signed plea agreement.
| Date | Event | Relevance to case |
|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Work authorization expiration reported in federal records | Can affect work eligibility and later I-9 attestations |
| May 2024 | Immigration judge issued a final removal order | Often increases ICE enforcement options and narrows future immigration relief |
| September 30, 2025 | Resignation from Des Moines Public Schools | Governance disruption and employment fallout after allegations surfaced |
| October 3, 2025 | ICE press release summarized allegations and history | Public description of the enforcement posture and claimed factual basis |
| January 21, 2026 | Plea agreement signed | Sets admissions and sentencing recommendations, but does not guarantee the sentence |
Plea agreement and counts
Roberts’ plea agreement, dated January 21, 2026, centers on a 2023 employment document: the I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification form used nationwide to confirm authorization to work.
Prosecutors say he “knowingly and intentionally” made a false U.S. citizenship attestation on Form I-9 to obtain employment. Section 2’s two charges track different parts of federal law, but both can carry immigration consequences that extend beyond jail time.
False claim of U.S. citizenship is treated differently from many other misrepresentations. In many cases, it can trigger harsh immigration outcomes because it goes to citizenship itself, rather than a visa category or a work-permit status.
For the government to prove the offense, prosecutors generally must show the defendant made a representation of U.S. citizenship, knew it was false, and did so for a purpose tied to a federal or state benefit. In this case, the asserted benefit is employment, based on the I-9 citizenship attestation.
The firearm count relies on a separate concept: federal restrictions that prohibit certain noncitizens from possessing guns, depending on immigration status. “Illegal alien in possession” cases often turn on whether the person fell within the prohibited status category at the time of possession, and whether the possession element can be proved through evidence like recovery, fingerprints, admissions, or witness testimony.
Plea agreements commonly include stipulated facts, agreed guideline positions, and a recommendation for leniency. They typically do not bind the sentencing judge, who applies the federal sentencing guidelines and considers statutory factors such as history, deterrence, and public safety.
The section below on specific charges and penalties is presented as explanatory text to lead into the interactive tool that displays the detailed counts and statutory elements.
Rather than a static table here, an interactive tool will present the precise elements, statutory citations, maximum penalties, and likely immigration consequences for each charge. That tool will allow users to explore statutory text and customary sentencing ranges while preserving the distinction between allegations and adjudicated facts.
Evidence and enforcement activity
The firearms allegation is tied to what authorities say they recovered during the enforcement operation. ICE said Roberts was detained on September 26, 2025, during what it described as a “targeted enforcement operation,” and authorities alleged he fled in a district-issued vehicle before being apprehended in a wooded area.
Federal cases generally document physical evidence through search warrants or consent searches, inventories, chain-of-custody logs, lab testing when needed, and agent reports. Those records can affect detention arguments, plea negotiations, and whether prosecutors add or dismiss counts.
Authorities described the firearms evidence as including four weapons, with at least one located in a vehicle and others associated with his home. The weapons described publicly include:
- Four weapons
- A loaded 9mm pistol in his vehicle
- Additional firearms recovered at his home
Agency public statements often present allegations as an enforcement narrative. Court filings, plea agreements, and sworn testimony are what typically determine which facts become legally established.
Credential and voter-registration allegations
Investigators also alleged Roberts misrepresented his academic credentials, including claims about Morgan State University and MIT that the institutions could not verify. Credential disputes can become legally relevant even when they are not charged crimes, because they can generate leads, prompt deeper background checks, and raise questions about statements made in hiring materials.
Public-sector hiring often relies on third-party searches, reference checks, and document verification. A mismatch between claimed degrees and verified records can create additional exposure for institutions, including contract disputes and civil litigation, even if prosecutors focus on different offenses.
Credential allegations also intersect with employment eligibility verification in a practical way. Hiring packets can include multiple attestations—résumé statements, background-check forms, and I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification—and inconsistencies can draw scrutiny when investigators compare them.
Voter registration allegations add another sensitive layer in citizenship cases. Federal and state systems treat citizenship representations tied to voting differently from many ordinary administrative errors, because voting is generally reserved for U.S. citizens and often requires an explicit citizenship certification.
Residency and citizenship representations can also serve as evidence of intent in a broader investigation. Even when a case does not charge a voting offense, a registration record can become part of the factual narrative in immigration and criminal proceedings.
Readers should separate three concepts that can carry different consequences: registering to vote, actually voting, and attesting to citizenship on a government form. Prosecutors and immigration authorities may assess each differently, depending on what was signed, what was submitted, and what can be proved.
Impact on the school district
Des Moines Public Schools faced immediate operational strain after Roberts resigned on September 30, 2025. The district serves about 30,000 students, and leadership turnover at the superintendent level can affect staffing, contracting, and public trust.
Large districts often depend on outside consultants to recruit senior administrators. Failures can occur when identity, immigration status, or credentials are not independently confirmed, or when warnings are missed in background-check workflows.
Des Moines Public Schools has said it pursued legal action against the consulting firm involved in the superintendent search, accusing it of inadequate screening. High-profile cases can also bring secondary litigation risk, including employment claims and vendor disputes, alongside reputational damage that can linger after the criminal case ends.
Note the potential for deportation and how plea bargains can influence sentencing and immigration relief eligibility. A criminal plea can strengthen DHS’s removal case, and some convictions or factual admissions may limit future relief, even when a defendant is not sentenced to the statutory maximum.
Immigration background and enforcement implications
Roberts is a native of Guyana who entered the United States in 1999 on a student visa, federal records show. Student status generally requires ongoing compliance, including limits on employment and the need to maintain school enrollment and authorization conditions.
Work authorization expiration in 2020 matters because it can affect whether someone is eligible to work and what they can attest to on an I-9. In practical terms, an expired work authorization can place an employee and an employer in a high-risk area if continued employment rests on a false work-eligibility claim.
An immigration judge issued a final removal order for Roberts in May 2024, according to federal records. A final removal order typically means the government has legal authority to remove the person, and later encounters with law enforcement can lead to faster ICE action, including detention, depending on custody status and enforcement priorities.
Criminal investigators and immigration agents often use a paper trail to build these cases, including I-9 records, identity documents, DMV files, and court entries. That documentary approach can be central when prosecutors allege “falsely claiming U.S. citizenship” through a work form rather than through a border encounter.
Evidence handling and prosecutorial practice
Federal cases generally document physical evidence through search warrants or consent searches, inventories, chain-of-custody logs, lab testing when needed, and agent reports. Those records can affect detention arguments, plea negotiations, and whether prosecutors add or dismiss counts.
Agency public statements are often framed as enforcement narratives; by contrast, court filings, plea agreements, and sworn testimony are the materials that typically determine which facts become legally established.
Guidance and sources
Readers should understand the I-9 verification context and how credential misrepresentation can affect eligibility for employment in public institutions. USCIS guidance on the I-9 process explains how employers review identity and work-authorization documents, and how false attestations can carry legal consequences.
Official government sources remain central to tracking the case posture and the immigration implications. The ICE newsroom item dated October 3, 2025, outlines the agency’s allegations and enforcement framing, while DOJ updates through the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Iowa, typically reflect charging and plea posture as the court schedule changes.
USCIS I-9 guidance explains how employment eligibility verification works and why U.S. citizenship attestation is legally consequential for both criminal exposure and immigration status assessments. Readers can review general I-9 information at uscis.gov and federal case information through justice.gov.
Legal disclaimer
This article discusses criminal charges and immigration consequences. It should avoid legal advice; readers should consult qualified counsel for individualized guidance.
All statements should reflect officially sourced information (ICE, DOJ, DHS, USCIS) and distinguish allegations from adjudicated facts.
