MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — In a significant ruling related to recent immigration enforcement actions, U.S. District Judge Kate Menendez determined that federal officers in the Minneapolis area cannot detain or use tear gas against peaceful protesters who are not obstructing their activities. This decision, made on Friday, addresses a case filed in December by six Minnesota activists who have been observing the operations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents since the crackdown on immigration began in mid-December 2022.
The enforcement operations, intensified under the Trump administration, have sparked repeated clashes between federal agents and demonstrators. Tensions escalated following the fatal shooting of 29-year-old Renee Good by an ICE agent on January 7, 2023, while she was driving away from a scene in Minneapolis. This incident, captured on video from multiple angles, led to further protests and confrontations in the area.
Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota, the activists argue that their constitutional rights have been violated amid the heightened enforcement activity in the Twin Cities. Following the ruling, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin issued a statement asserting that her agency is committed to upholding the rule of law while also protecting officers and the public from “dangerous rioters.” She emphasized the seriousness of obstructing law enforcement, labeling such actions a federal crime.
Judge Menendez’s ruling specifically prohibits federal officers from detaining individuals in vehicles unless they have reasonable suspicion of obstruction or interference. It clarifies that merely following agents at a safe distance does not constitute reasonable suspicion, and agents cannot arrest individuals without probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime. The ruling is expected to influence the ongoing dynamics between federal enforcement officers and community members observing their actions.
Menendez is concurrently overseeing a lawsuit filed by the state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, seeking to suspend the immigration enforcement crackdown. During a recent hearing, she declined to grant an immediate temporary restraining order requested by the state but acknowledged the importance of the legal issues raised. She noted that these issues involve fundamental constitutional questions that require thorough examination, as precedents are limited. Both parties have been ordered to submit additional briefs regarding the ongoing litigation.
The interactions between federal law enforcement and activists in the Minneapolis area continue to evolve amid a backdrop of heightened scrutiny and community concern. Following the ruling, the ACLU did not immediately provide comments, but the decision marks an important development in the ongoing dialogue about immigration enforcement practices and the rights of individuals to peacefully observe and protest.
Audrey McAvoy and Steve Karnowski of the Associated Press contributed to this report. In a series of unfolding events, the implications of this ruling for both law enforcement operations and community activism will be closely watched as further developments occur in Minneapolis.
