The State of Minnesota, joined by the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, officially filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the Trump administration, aiming to halt all Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations across the Twin Cities.
The lawsuit, led by Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison, names individuals such as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, ICE Director Todd Lyons, and Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino, among others, as defendants in the case involving Trump’s top officials.
The lawsuit seeks to get an immediate injunction to end the ICE operations in Minnesota aimed at fighting widespread fraud – known as “Operation Metro Surge” – and block any other similar future ICE operations in Minnesota.
“Operation Metro Surge” has deployed thousands of ICE officers and Homeland Security investigators to Minnesota since late last year, with a boosted focus on immigration enforcement and other related fraud investigations. Fraud investigations have gone viral, showing a potential for billions of dollars lost in connection with Somali crime rings, as previously reported by The Dallas Express.
Minnesota’s state leaders have claimed that the presence of ICE agents has caused widespread disruptions. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, also a Democrat, referenced ICE as a dangerous imposition, while somewhat sidestepping any accusations of the mass widespread fraud that is running rampant across his state.
However, in a press conference announcing the lawsuit on Monday afternoon, Frey did respond to some of those billion-dollar fraud accusations, saying: “This is not about fraud; you do not hold an entire community or city accountable for the actions of fraudsters.”
Ellison added his support for the lawsuit on Monday, saying, “We allege that the obvious targeting of Minnesota for our diversity, for our democracy, and our differences of opinion with the federal government is a violation of the Constitution and of federal law. We allege that the surge’s reckless impact on our schools, on our local law enforcement, is a violation of the 10th Amendment and the sovereign laws and powers of the Constitution grants to states. We allege that DHS forces use of excessive and lethal force, their warrantless racist arrests, their targeting of our courts.”
The lawsuit argues that the presence of ICE agents is “unconstitutional” under the 10th Amendment, which reserves “non-delegated” powers to the states and has been invoked in prior cases throughout history to prevent federal “commandeering” of state resources or interference with state sovereignty.
States and cities have previously sued the federal government over immigration enforcement multiple times before. Examples include California’s successful defense of its sanctuary-state law against federal challenges in March of 2018.
Outcomes of these unique high-profile lawsuits often hinge on “anti-commandeering” principles from cases like Printz v. United States and Murphy v. NCAA (a case that successfully challenged a federal law prohibiting state-authorized sports gambling).
Full cases like this could potentially take months to years to see any impact, escalating to appellate courts or the Supreme Court. If an injunction is granted to these Democratic Minnesota politicians, it could impede ICE operations in Minnesota by halting or restricting the agency’s operations in the area.
The Department of Homeland Security has not yet issued a formal response to the filing as of press time, though administration officials under Trump have defended the ICE presence as essential and crucial for addressing the influx of fraud and illegal aliens within the state.
