A Trump-appointed judge dealt the Trump administration a major setback Monday, tossing out its lawsuit against Minnesota’s sanctuary immigration policies and ruling the state cannot be compelled to assist federal immigration enforcement.
The battle centered on whether the Trump administration can use the Supremacy Clause to knock down Minnesota’s sanctuary laws, which include policies that bar local officials from holding immigrants solely on ICE detainers, restrict participation in federal immigration enforcement and limit the sharing of driver’s license and immigration-related data with ICE.
The Justice Department argued Minnesota’s restrictions illegally hinder ICE, but Chief U.S. District Judge Eric Tostrud rejected that argument, ruling states have the constitutional authority to decide how their own officials participate in immigration enforcement.
In a 56-page opinion, Tostrud dismissed every claim brought by the Justice Department against Minnesota, Minneapolis, St. Paul and Hennepin County, concluding the challenged laws regulate only state and local officials, not the federal government.
DOJ ESCALATES BLUE-STATE ICE STANDOFF AFTER STATES REFUSE KEY FEDERAL REQUEST
“They do not command the federal government or its contractors to act. They do not forbid the federal government or its contractors from acting. They do not control how the federal government or its contractors undertake their work,” Tostrud wrote. “Rather, they regulate how state and local officials perform their duties.”
The ruling marks a significant setback for the administration’s broader effort to block sanctuary policies across the country by arguing they unlawfully interfere with federal immigration enforcement.
But Eric Wessan, an attorney in the Iowa Solicitor General’s Office, said he believed Tostrud’s ruling conflicts with an earlier Eighth Circuit decision that he says gives the federal government stronger grounds to challenge state laws that interfere with federal immigration enforcement.
“States across the country have passed laws making state immigration crimes. The Eighth Circuit (which includes Minnesota) found one of those laws obstructed federal immigration enforcement, and so it was preempted,” Wessan told Fox News Digital. “Judge Tostrud cited that opinion to explain that preemption is narrow. I think that his opinion is hard to square with the binding precedent.”
The Justice Department argued Minnesota’s laws and local ordinances conflict with federal immigration statutes by restricting local officers from honoring ICE detainers, limiting information sharing with federal authorities and preventing local officials from participating in immigration enf
