Judge orders Trump administration to address motives behind ICE's Minnesota operation
A federal judge on Monday ordered the Trump administration to address the motives behind ICE'simmigration enforcementeffort in Minnesota as the state seeks a temporary halt to the operation.
At a hearing Monday, U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez heard arguments on Minnesota's request for a temporary restraining order to pause "Operation Metro Surge."
The hearing came two days after the death of37-year-old Alex Prettiin what was the second shooting of a U.S. citizen this month by federal immigration enforcement agents in Minneapolis.
Following the hearing, the judge ordered the Trump administration to respond to the state's argument that the operation was created to "punish" Minnesota for its immigration sanctuary laws.
In the order, Judge Menendez asked the federal government to address the state's claim that the operation was put in place to punish the state for adopting sanctuary laws and policies; to coerce officials into changing state and local laws; to compel the state to use its resources to share information with federal immigration enforcement; and to force local authorities to use more resources to hold immigration enforcement targets in detention for longer than otherwise allowed.
The judge ordered the government to file the supplemental brief by Wednesday at 6 p.m. ET.
An attorney representing the state said during Monday's hearing that the Operation Metro Surge is the nation's single largest escalation of immigration enforcement, despite Minnesota not having the largest number of non-citizens with criminal convictions.
"Yet the federal government has sent an unprecedented force of thousands of masked agents armed with assault rifles to spread through our region in roving patrols that are racially profiling and inflicting violence on people," argued state attorney Lindsey Middlecamp.
Brian Carter, another state attorney, argued that there's a lack of precedent because "the conduct [from the federal government] is so outrageously unlawful we've never seen it before."
"In the 250 years of this nation's history, we have never seen a federal government attack states based on personal animosity," Carter argued.
"Well, we've seen the federal government take very robust responses to states that aren't yielding to federal authority," Judge Menendez interrupted.
"Absolutely, but that's based on the rule of law," Carter responded.
When Judge Menendez asked what exactly the state wants her to do, Carter said, "End Operation Metro Surge."
"The whole Operation Metro Surge is an illegal means to an illegal end, so just ending the whole thing is the appropriate remedy there," Carter said.
"You understand the federal government has a lot of power in this area, so I'm trying to figure out what principle you're asking me to apply that will sort out legal federal law enforcement from this 10th Amendment argument," Judge Menendez said.
An attorney representing the federal government called the state's request to end Operation Metro Surge "staggering."
"The effect of their requested relief would be essentially removing the officers whom the president has concluded should be there to enforce federal immigration law," said attorney Brantley Mayers. "It's pretty staggering."
Mayers argued that the requested relief should be subject to "a heightened standard."
"They're challenging one law enforcement initiative," replied Judge Menendez. "They're not challenging the enforcement of immigration law writ large."
Mayers said that if the judge issues an order to end Operation Metro Surge, it "would be very difficult to implement."
"If it's difficult to implement, does that mean I can do nothing?" Judge Menendez asked.
Mayers responded by saying such an order would create a "very difficult separation of powers problem."
The judge also said she is "grappling" with the alleged illegalities identified by the state, pointing to other lawsuits filed in Minnesota.
"Isn't the answer to the flood of illegality to fight each illegal act?" Judge Menendez asked, noting that the conduct of federal agents is already the subject of separate litigation.
Menendez also questioned how she should draw the line between legitimate federal pressure and illegal coercion.
"How do I decide when a law enforcement response crosses the line from a legitimate response to one that violates the 10th Amendment?" she asked.
Carter argued that there are "4,000 masked, armed federal agents engaged in systemic, pervasive, and illegal violent behavior" that is "so far out on the other side of the line."
"We've got retaliation, we've got racial profiling, we've got warrantless entries into homes," Carter said.
Middlecamp said that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi'sletter to Gov. Tim WalzSaturday in which she sought information about the state's voter rolls and records on Medicaid and Food and Nutrition Service programs as a condition for ICE agents to pull back on enforcement, "can only be described as a ransom note."
"President Trump himself took to social media last night to reaffirm those very purposes. Their message is clear," Middlecamp said. "Minnesota can either change its laws and policies or suffer an invasion of masked armed forces. This is precisely the type of coercion and commandeering that violates the 10th Amendment."
Middlecamp argued there has been "excessive force and unsupported detentions and arrests of legal observers" and said that DHS agents have been collecting photos and license plates of observers so they can confront them.
"Even though they are not charged with a crime or reasonably suspected of a crime, there has been indiscriminate use of chemical irritants," she said.
The attorney argued that Operation Metro Surge is having "clear impacts on the sovereign interest to create and protect public safety, public health, and public education."
Sara Lathrop, an attorney for the city of Minneapolis, said the weekend's shooting "demonstrated in a terrifying way that the current situation is absolutely untenable."
"The relief we need needs to be ordered now to take down the temperature," Lathrop said.
In response, Judge Menendez said that "not all crises have a fix from a district court injunction."
Carter, the state attorney, wrapped up arguments by saying the state came to the court to "protect its sovereignty."
"The state of Minnesota comes here today to protect its sovereignty, to stop the harm to its sovereign rights under the Constitution that sets states up as independent sovereigns," Carter said. "If we can't come to the court and vindicate those rights, where else does a state go?"
