Trump Administration Winds Down Minneapolis Immigration Operation Amid Controversy
The Trump administration has significantly scaled back its aggressive, military-style immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis and across the United States, according to recent reports. This pullback comes as emergency lawsuits from immigrants seeking release from detention have declined in recent weeks, marking a notable shift in tactics.
Operational Changes and Leadership Shakeup
In February, the administration announced it was drawing down its Minnesota operation, which had resulted in agents fatally shooting two U.S. citizens and prompted widespread protests. This month, the White House moved to oust Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversaw the controversial surge in enforcement activities. No new major crackdowns have been launched in any cities since these developments.
Nationwide, immigration arrests decreased by approximately 11 percent in February, according to a New York Times analysis. However, arrest levels remain nearly four times higher than those recorded during the Biden administration. Reports of agents storming Home Depot parking lots, arresting immigrant day laborers, or conducting raids on apartment buildings have tapered off for the moment.
Legal Challenges and Detention Policies
Despite the operational slowdown, critics warn that the administration has shown no deeper signs of abandoning immigration policies they allege lead to racial profiling and mass, illegal arrests. Last year, the Trump administration reinterpreted longstanding precedent, claiming that arrested immigrants—even those who have been in the U.S. for years and lack criminal records—were not eligible to seek bond as their immigration cases moved through the system, a process that can take months or years.
"The objective is 100 percent for individuals to give up," said Rekha Sharma-Crawford, a Missouri-based attorney and second vice president at the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "It is designed to short-circuit any due process that they may be entitled to."
These changes, paired with intense political pressure from the White House—where Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller reportedly berated agents to conduct 3,000 arrests per day—led to a spike in immigrants behind bars. This surge also resulted in scores of emergency habeas corpus challenges, where federal officials must justify before a judge why they are holding someone in detention.
Overwhelmed Courts and Declining Petitions
Between January and mid-February of this year, there were between 300 and 400 such petitions filed daily, overwhelming federal courts and Justice Department officials. Since peaking on February 6, the number of habeas challenges has declined, reaching roughly 300 per day in late February and approaching 200 per day in early March.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson emphasized that "nobody is changing the Administration’s immigration enforcement agenda." She added, "President Trump’s highest priority has always been the deportation of illegal alien criminals who endanger American communities." Jackson claimed that approximately 3 million undocumented immigrants have left the United States under Trump's policies, with zero illegal crossings at what she called "the most secure border in U.S. History" for nine straight months.
Unprecedented Legal Action and Judicial Pushback
Since January of last year, immigrants have filed more than 26,000 habeas cases—more than the number filed during the last three administrations combined, according to a ProPublica database. Immigrants have resorted to this legal tool because the Trump administration has shut off most other avenues to challenge detention in facilities accused of poor health conditions, legal access violations, and widespread mistreatment.
"We’re suing the federal government weekly," immigration lawyer Jeremy McKinney, former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told Mother Jones earlier this month. "We have to kick the door down."
Federal judges have been nearly unanimous against the Trump administration's new detention policies. Since Trump took office, hundreds of judges nationwide have ruled more than 4,400 times that immigrants were being illegally detained. "There is a reason why hundreds of cases across the country have found the new interpretation of the law by the administration, that offsets decades of precedent, to be unlawful," Sharma-Crawford explained.
Administration Resistance and Courtroom Conflicts
Judges and immigrants alike have accused the administration of systematically ignoring court orders. In hotspots like Minnesota, judges have threatened government attorneys with contempt or even prison time over patterns of ignoring or slow-walking court directives. Minnesota U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen argued that any compliance issues stemmed from mistakes rather than malice, citing the administration's fast-moving approach to immigration enforcement.
"As the surge was ongoing, ICE was constantly instituting new procedures to try to keep up with these issues," Rosen reportedly told a judge. "Perfection was never achieved."
Recent Legal Developments and Future Implications
Despite the slight dip in habeas complaints, the administration's underlying attempt to detain tens of thousands of immigrants continues. Earlier this month, a federal appeals court covering Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas ruled that the Trump administration can hold immigrants without bond, regardless of how long they have been in the U.S.
"It’s taken the ability to pursue your immigration case and claims without being detained off the table for thousands of people," said Sarah Whittington, advocacy director at the ACLU of Louisiana. Also in March, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals paused a series of orders that created a nationwide class of immigrants entitled to bond hearings.
The political calculus around launching another Minneapolis-style operation may be changing, especially as polls show voters disapprove of the president's immigration policies heading into midterm season. However, Sharma-Crawford argued that the administration still clearly has its sights set on mass, long-term detention and sweeping arrests.
"In the deeper, more conservative states, what they’re doing is going in and opening up these massive detention facilities," she said. "That’s some writing on the wall that says they are only intent on increasing the number of people that they want to detain."
