An warrant can allow specific individuals to be arrested/detained without having probable cause. But a judicial warrant is required to search, detain, arrest, etc in a manner that would otherwise violate civil liberties (e.g. entering private property to enforce the warrant).

The language you used here is a bit confusing/misleading. Just want to clarify.

A) Detainment in the US does not require a warrant of any kind, ever. It doesn’t even require probable cause. The bar for detainment is only reasonable suspicion of a crime or civil violation under their purview. They don’t even have to see you do a specific action that could be criminal in itself.

Simply walking around in a high crime area at odd hours can be enough to detain you, alone. Generally matching the description of a suspect that could reasonably be you, even if you’re doing absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, is enough to detain you, too.

And they also don’t have to share the reason for their suspicion with you, btw, so you may not even be aware of what they are trying to find evidence of, meaning you may be unable to either dissuade them of the suspicion or dispute in court that they even had reasonable suspicion or the grounds for it at the time. Reasonable suspicion is a pretty low bar and heavily in the favor of law enforcement.

But also detainment must be reasonably short, used only for the purposes of seeking evidence confirming or assuaging their suspicions, and otherwise not intruding upon the constitutional rights of the suspect (no searches or seizures of property without consent (barring civil forfeiture, which is a whole can of worms I’m not going to get into), no restrictions on or retaliation for speech, etc.)

B) An administrative warrant does not require probable cause, you’re correct. But a judicial one does, just to be clear. A judicial warrant is issued when law enforcement demonstrates that they have enough evidence to meet the threshold of probable cuase of a crime without directly witnessing it themselves in the moment.

But then, yes, as you suggested, an administrative warrant, having a lower threshold to issuance and only pertaining to civil matters, also provides less authority to the agents holding it to intrude upon one’s private property. They cannot overstep the bounds of the 4th amendment to enter a home, for example, without probable cause of a crime, either witnessed in progress, or granted by judicial warrant, or exigent circumstances.

C) Unfortunately, these legal protections have become less reliable under the Trump administration which continuously defies the law and judicial orders and review. ICE and Border Control have been given carte blanche by the Supreme Court to consider apparent race, language spoken, or other cultural identifiers as reasonable suspicion for violations of immigration policy or status. And their documented policies, erroneously, tell their agents that their administrative warrants grant them the power to enter private homes, offices and vehicles to execute arrests based on them.

Despite repeated judicial orders that tell them that this is illegal and to stop acting on this policy, they continue to do so with no apparent consequences apart from losing the occasional habeas case and releasing people they’ve illegally harassed, arrested and jailed for months. The fear and torment are part of the design, you see. So whatever the rules say, that doesn’t stop fascists from doing what they want when no one actually stops them, turns out.