A federal court has rebuked immigration authorities over detention practices in Minnesota, ruling that recent enforcement operations effectively shut thousands of detainees out from their lawyers.
In a sharply worded order, U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel found that tactics used during “Operation Metro Surge” — including rapid out-of-state transfers and severe limits on phone access — left detainees functionally cut off from legal representation. The judge directed immigration officials to halt those transfers and ensure meaningful access to attorneys, including private visits and confidential phone calls.
The ruling stems from a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of noncitizen detainees. For now, the court’s order will remain in effect for 14 days as the case continues.
Rapid Transfers, Vanishing Clients
At the center of the dispute is how detainees were handled after being processed at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis. According to the court’s findings, many were moved out of Minnesota almost immediately — often without notice to family or legal counsel. In some cases, transfers were so swift and frequent that authorities themselves appeared to lose track of detainees’ whereabouts.
Judge Brasel concluded that these practices “all but extinguish” access to counsel, a constitutional right that ICE did not dispute in court.
The judge was unconvinced by claims of limited resources. While acknowledging the scale of the enforcement surge, she noted that substantial manpower and funding had been devoted to detaining and housing thousands of individuals. That investment, she wrote, undercut arguments that the agency could not also provide adequate legal access.
Phones in Name Only
Though officials maintained that detainees had phone access, the court found those arrangements inadequate.
Evidence presented showed that calls were frequently conducted in open areas, within earshot of officers and other detainees — compromising attorney-client confidentiality. In some facilities, shared flip phones were rationed among dozens of people, with calls limited to just a few minutes per person.
One asylum seeker cited in the lawsuit, a 20-year-old with a valid work permit, was shuffled from Minnesota to Texas and then to New Mexico before being returned. He spent 18 days in custody, despite a prior court directive ordering his release within five days. During that time, he reportedly received no explanation for either his detention or eventual release.
Legal Access Not “Optional”
Advocates behind the lawsuit argued that immigration enforcement does not dilute constitutional protections. They accused authorities of detaining individuals in facilities not designed for long-term custody, imposing shackling practices, and obstructing legal oversight.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security rejected claims of overcrowding and insisted detainees could contact attorneys and family members.
But the court’s findings paint a different picture — one of systemic barriers that, in practice, isolated thousands of people from legal help at a critical moment.
For now, immigration officials in Minnesota must slow the churn of transfers and open clearer lines to counsel. Whether those changes become permanent will depend on how the broader legal battle unfolds in the weeks ahead.
