Judge rules ICE can continue enforcement in Minnesota

(CN) — A federal judge cleared the way for thousands of federal immigration agents to remain in Minnesota, Saturday, Jan. 31, rejecting an attempt by state and city leaders to halt the enforcement surge in the Twin Cities.

In a 30-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez acknowledged the “profound and even heartbreaking” effects of the federal enforcement surge on the Twin Cities but ruled that the state and its cities failed to meet the high legal standard needed to halt a federal law enforcement operation.

Menendez, a Biden appointee, found the state’s 10th Amendment and Equal Sovereignty claims lacked sufficient precedent, noting the court cannot easily “micromanage” the Executive Branch’s discretionary deployment of federal personnel.

At a Jan. 26 hearing on Minnesota’s motion for a preliminary injunction, Menendez questioned the Justice Department about whether the surge was a legitimate law enforcement action or a tool of political coercion.

While she acknowledged the coercive implications of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s letter linking the surge to a possible repeal of state sanctuary policies, Menendez ultimately said the court lacked authority to halt the entire operation, suggesting the state pursue smaller, more targeted actions against claimed illegal actions of federal agents.

The ruling comes amid a legal battle between Minnesota and the federal government over “Operation Metro Surge” — a federal enforcement initiative intended to address immigration and weed out fraud in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area.

Throughout the surge, the Trump administration deployed around 3,000 federal agents. While Department of Homeland Security agents are reportedly focused on probing billion-dollar fraud schemes, the majority of the surge — and the focus of the lawsuit — consists of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers conducting street-level arrests across the neighborhoods of the Twin Cities.

State officials in Minnesota filed a suit against the federal government on Jan. 12, claiming the mass deployment of federal agents in the state violated the 10th Amendment, which reserves to the states the right to protect the health, safety, and well-being of their residents.

“Operation Metro Surge is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities,” Minnesota said in its complaint, claiming that Minnesotans have been racially profiled, harassed, targeted and assaulted amid the federal crackdown.

Minnesota also accused the Trump administration of targeting the state and its officials because of their Democratic leanings, and argued that the fraud justification is a pretext.

The Trump administration has maintained that enforcement operations in Minnesota are necessary and within the federal government’s authority, and the Department of Justice has argued that Minnesota is attempting to create a “state veto” over lawful federal action carried out under the government’s constitutional powers.

The DOJ’s brief states that Operation Metro Surge was launched as a federal mission because Minnesota’s sanctuary laws have hindered routine cooperation and forced a more aggressive presence — one that the federal government claims has put law enforcement at risk.

“In and around Minneapolis, ICE officers operating out of the St. Paul office have been confronted with increased threats, violence, aggression, attacks, vehicle block-ins, and obstruction of immigration enforcement operation,” The DOJ said, adding that, despite this, the recent surge has already resulted in more than 3,000 arrests of individuals with serious criminal records.

“Minnesota is safer because of this project,” the DOJ said. “Persons convicted of murder, aggravated assault, domestic abuse, drug trafficking and other serious crimes have been arrested through this effort.”

In its initial complaint, Minnesota also requested limits to be put on federal agents, including the use of chemical irritants and projectiles against peaceful protestors. That conduct was the subject of a Jan. 16 court ruling, although the Trump administration flatly opposes the attempt to govern when officers may use force, the appeals court has already reversed the ruling.

In a separate lawsuit on Jan. 15, the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota accused immigration agents of racially profiling U.S. citizens of Somali and Latino descent — claiming that ICE agents have detained, tackled and otherwise harassed individuals despite attempts to show documentation.

The state and federal conflict escalated after two federal agent-involved fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, events that both sides of the political aisle used to embolden their stance against one another, until the Trump administration backtracked this week.

The president sent in border czar Tom Homan to replace Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino in an attempt to quell the growing backlash from the Pretti shooting — after which Trump administration officials initially called Pretti a “domestic terrorist.”

The shootings sparked a wave of local and nationwide protests and agitation against federal enforcement.

Federal officials have maintained that their operations in Minnesota are essential for executing the administration’s immigration policies, particularly in an area where state officials have declined to assist.

The ruling is far from the end of legal battles in Minnesota. Aside from a likely appeal and several other pending lawsuits, the DOJ is also currently investigating Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey for conspiracy to impede federal agents.