Minnesota Just Agreed to a Major Concession to the Trump Administration on Immigration Enforcement

White House border czar Tom Homan announced on Thursday that Minnesota county jails will begin sharing information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) when they are scheduled to release illegal immigrants who have criminal backgrounds.

During a press conference, Homan explained that Attorney General Keith Ellison “has clarified for me that county jails may notify ICE of the release dates of criminal public safety risks so I can take custody upon the release from the jail.”

This announcement marks a significant shift in the state’s approach to working with federal immigration authorities. Previously, they refused to allow local law enforcement to collaborate with ICE and Border Patrol to apprehend and remove illegal immigrants — even those who committed violent crimes.

Homan said the Minnesota Department of Corrections has consistently honored ICE detainers and stressed that any reduction in the number of federal agents in Minnesota would be contingent on continued cooperation from state and local officials.

President Donald Trump sent Homan to Minnesota earlier this week to replace Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino, who had led Operation Metro Surge. The operation involved deploying 3,000 federal agents to the Minneapolis area.

ICE issued a memo on Monday explaining that the agency is shifting toward “targeted enforcement of individuals with a criminal background.” The memo emphasized that “ALL CALLS MUST HAVE A CRIMINAL NEXUS.”

The pivot came after two fatal shootings of U.S. citizens by Border Patrol and ICE agents. Renee Good was killed on January 7 by an ICE agent after she clipped him with her vehicle. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said she was trying to run the agent over. However, critics point to video footage that appears to show her trying...

The smart play here (and I think Holman is pretty smart) is to try to turn the mob against their Minnesota democrat masters like Walz and Fry. Keep publicly stating that they are agreeing to concessions and to work with the administration and ICE/Border Patrol. This will enrage the mob even further and force Walz, Fry, Ellison etc to either issue a blanket denial (putting them on the wrong side of the issue with much of the country), keep silent (an admission of guilt to the mob) or try to explain away their cooperation (making them the enemy of the mob). This mob is not rational and that should be used against them.

“Minnesota Department of Corrections has consistently honored ICE detainers”

I saw that it’s the same in Washington State as well (also a huge sanctuary state), but the county jails don’t.

I’m curious as to why that is. Did they exempt the prisons from their dumb sanctuary rules because that’s where the murderers are housed and county jails are usually full of low level criminals or is there federal funding with super clear language that lets them stop the money unless these criminals are turned over to them?

And then I aske Brave...

“Key Legal Cases
1. Miranda-Olivares v. Clackamas County (2014)
A federal court in Oregon ruled that holding an individual on an ICE detainer after they are eligible for release constitutes a new arrest.

The court held that ICE detainers do not provide probable cause, making prolonged detention unconstitutional.
Clackamas County was found liable for unlawful detention.

2. Galarza v. Szalczyk (2014)
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that ICE detainers are voluntary, not mandatory.

Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, was held liable for detaining a U.S. citizen based solely on an ICE request.

This established that local jurisdictions can be sued for complying with detainers.

3. Morales v. Chadbourne (2015)
The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that detaining someone beyond their release date based on an ICE detainer is a Fourth Amendment violation.

The court emphasized that probable cause is required for any new arrest, which a detainer alone does not provide.

4. Lunn v. Commonwealth (2017)
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that state law does not authorize local officers to arrest individuals based solely on civil immigration detainers.

This reinforced that detainers cannot override state legal frameworks.

5. Gonzalez v. ICE (2020)
A federal court in California issued a permanent injunction barring ICE from issuing detainers based solely on unreliable database checks.

The court ruled that such practices violate the Fourth Amendment and ICE’s own statutory authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1357.

These cases collectively establish that honoring ICE detainers without a judicial warrant or probable cause exposes county jails to legal liability and constitutional violations.”

Effing judges. This is a definitely something that Congress needs to fix. They need to work the courts over with a rubber hose and clearly remove all jurisdiction over any immigration related cases from Article III courts and clearly state that immigration due process stays in immigration courts and that warrants and orders from Immigration courts are superior to the Article III courts.

Not that it will ever happen.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.