Federal Government Challenges Local Authority on Immigration Enforcement; State and Local Officials Decry ‘Political Retaliation’
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit against the state of Minnesota, its two largest cities—Minneapolis and St. Paul—and Hennepin County over policies the agency argues obstruct federal immigration enforcement. The lawsuit, filed Monday, is the latest action in the Trump administration’s effort to challenge so-called “sanctuary policies” across the nation.
The DOJ’s complaint asks a federal court to invalidate state and local laws and policies that it asserts impede the federal government’s authority to enforce immigration policies. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that these policies result in the release of “dangerous criminals who would otherwise be subject to deportation.”
In a statement, Attorney General Pam Bondi said, “Minnesota officials are jeopardizing the safety of their own citizens by allowing illegal aliens to circumvent the legal process.”
Key Policies Challenged
The core of the dispute centers on local restrictions on cooperation with federal immigration authorities. While Minnesota has no statewide “sanctuary” law, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Hennepin County have policies limiting how much their law enforcement and employees can cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The lawsuit cites an advisory opinion issued by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison in February, which stated that state and local authorities are not authorized to hold individuals solely for federal immigration detainers if they would otherwise be released from custody.
Additionally, the DOJ’s suit notes that the state bars sharing driver’s license data for immigration enforcement. The Hennepin County jail is specifically noted for not holding people solely on immigration detainers or notifying immigration authorities of the release of individuals subject to them.
The term “sanctuary jurisdiction” generally refers to governments with policies limiting cooperation with immigration authorities, though it lacks a precise legal definition. Courts have previously upheld the legality of such local laws.
Local Officials Respond
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison pushed back, stating the lawsuit is “just more political retaliation against Minnesota” and is “baseless.” He contended that the state is not preventing the federal government from partnering with local law enforcement to prosecute dangerous individuals.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey staunchly defended the city’s policies. “Minneapolis proudly welcomes immigrants, refugees, and families seeking opportunity,” Frey said, adding that the city will not “back down.” He characterized the lawsuit as “a fear-driven, politically motivated lawsuit.”
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has previously rejected the assertion that Minnesota is a sanctuary state. Governor Walz was among several Democratic governors recently questioned by a U.S. House oversight committee regarding their states’ immigration policies.
Broader Context
Minnesota is the latest jurisdiction targeted by the Trump administration, which has previously filed similar lawsuits against states and cities, including Colorado, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Boston, Chicago, Denver, and Los Angeles.
These actions are part of a broader conflict between federal immigration enforcement efforts and local governments seeking to limit their involvement in those efforts.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
