A federal judge in Minnesota has heard arguments from both sides in a case challenging the Trump administration's immigration enforcement crackdown, which has led to two fatal shootings of immigrants in the state. The judge, Katherine Menendez, is considering halting the operation, known as Operation Metro Surge, which was launched on December 1.
The state and cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have argued that the situation on the streets is dire and requires immediate action from the court to stop the federal government's enforcement actions. Minnesota Assistant Attorney General Brian Carter told the judge that if this isn't stopped right now, "I don't think anybody who is seriously looking at this problem can have much faith in how our republic is going to go in the future."
The Justice Department has countered that the lawsuit is "legally frivolous" and that Minnesota wants a veto over federal law enforcement. The government's goal is to enforce federal law, according to Brantley Mayers, counsel to the Justice Department's assistant attorney general.
Judge Menendez expressed skepticism about the government's motivation behind the crackdown, asking if there isn't a limit to what the executive can do under the guise of enforcing immigration law. She also questioned where the line is between violating the Constitution and the executive's power to enforce the law.
The case has implications for other states that have been or could become targets of ramped-up federal immigration enforcement operations. Attorneys general from 19 states plus the District of Columbia, led by California, filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota, warning that if left unchecked, the federal government will "no doubt be emboldened to continue its unlawful conduct in Minnesota and to repeat it elsewhere."
The judge has also ruled in a separate case on January 16 that federal officers in Minnesota cannot detain or tear gas peaceful protesters who are not obstructing authorities. However, an appeals court temporarily suspended this ruling three days before Saturday's shooting.
The latest developments come as President Donald Trump said he had a "very good" call with Governor Tim Walz about the latest shooting and that they are now on a "similar wavelength." Trump also announced plans to send border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota, who will report directly to him.
The state and cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have argued that the situation on the streets is dire and requires immediate action from the court to stop the federal government's enforcement actions. Minnesota Assistant Attorney General Brian Carter told the judge that if this isn't stopped right now, "I don't think anybody who is seriously looking at this problem can have much faith in how our republic is going to go in the future."
The Justice Department has countered that the lawsuit is "legally frivolous" and that Minnesota wants a veto over federal law enforcement. The government's goal is to enforce federal law, according to Brantley Mayers, counsel to the Justice Department's assistant attorney general.
Judge Menendez expressed skepticism about the government's motivation behind the crackdown, asking if there isn't a limit to what the executive can do under the guise of enforcing immigration law. She also questioned where the line is between violating the Constitution and the executive's power to enforce the law.
The case has implications for other states that have been or could become targets of ramped-up federal immigration enforcement operations. Attorneys general from 19 states plus the District of Columbia, led by California, filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota, warning that if left unchecked, the federal government will "no doubt be emboldened to continue its unlawful conduct in Minnesota and to repeat it elsewhere."
The judge has also ruled in a separate case on January 16 that federal officers in Minnesota cannot detain or tear gas peaceful protesters who are not obstructing authorities. However, an appeals court temporarily suspended this ruling three days before Saturday's shooting.
The latest developments come as President Donald Trump said he had a "very good" call with Governor Tim Walz about the latest shooting and that they are now on a "similar wavelength." Trump also announced plans to send border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota, who will report directly to him.
those immigration enforcement operations gotta be super scary for people in Minnesota! I mean, not just the immigrants but also the law enforcement officers... it's crazy that a whole state is being put on high alert. What if this trend keeps going and we see more cases like this? It's interesting how some states are standing up against the feds and saying "no way" to these aggressive operations 
like how can ppl be killed b4 we even get 2 talk about what happend?! 
the gov is just trying 2 sweep this under the rug but i think the judge should def make a diff. i mean wht r they hiding lol? & dont even get me started on trump saying he had a "good" call with walz after those ppl got killed 
like, how r u even able 2 say that?! 
And if the government is really concerned about enforcing federal law, maybe they can find ways to do that without putting lives at risk. I'm not convinced by the idea that this whole thing is just "legally frivolous" either. There's definitely some confusion about what's going on here and where the lines get drawn between federal power and state control 
.
meanwhile, I'm over here thinking "can't we just find a solution that works for EVERYONE? 
like, come on! Can't they see how this whole thing affects people's lives? 
. But I guess what's going on in Minnesota is kinda concerning 
. So, this judge is trying to figure out if the Trump administration's immigration crackdown is even legit. I mean, two fatal shootings and people are saying it's dire? 
That's all well and good, but can we not just focus on solving actual problems for a second? 
. And what's up with the president trying to play politics again? "Similar wavelength" with the governor? Give me a break 
I mean, it takes days for news to sink in and then suddenly everyone's like "Oh no, let's all agree that this is terrible!" 
. Can't we have a more informed discussion than that? 