Minnesota under threat after Trump Justice Department sues ‘sanctuary’ states Illinois and New York

WASHINGTON — With the U.S. Department of Justice suing Illinois and New York over their “sanctuary laws,” Minnesota and the Twin Cities are preparing to defend themselves from a similar legal assault.

In its lawsuits, the Justice Department said state laws and local ordinances and policies in Illinois, Chicago and Cook County, Illinois, are “making it more difficult for, and deliberately impeding, federal immigration officers’ ability to carry out their responsibilities,” which is the roundup and deportations of undocumented immigrants.

The federal lawsuit against New York also said the state impeded the efforts of federal immigration officials.

“This is a new DOJ,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said when she announced the lawsuit against New York earlier this month. “We sued Illinois. New York did not listen, now you’re next.”

Bondi also used the occasion to warn other states the Justice Department accuses of harboring dangerous criminals. “If you are a state not complying with federal law, you’re next, get ready,” she said.

Besides threatening lawsuits that aim to force states to aid the federal government in its efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, the Justice Department has also said it will cut off federal grants to “sanctuary” states and local jurisdictions. Most of those grants helped bolster local and state police departments.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he’s ready to defend Minnesota if it is sued as a “sanctuary” jurisdiction.

“I have no fear of Trump, and his threats have no effect on my determination to protect Minnesota from his authoritarian bullying,” Ellison said. “As attorney general, I swore an oath to uphold the law and Constitution, not an aspiring dictator who admires other dictators.”

Ellison also said he urged other state and local officials in Minnesota to remember they also swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and Minnesota’s constitution.

Responding to any lawsuit against the Twin Cities, however, would not be Ellison’s job. It would be the responsibility of city attorneys, who, like Ellison, appear to be prepared.

Minneapolis has adopted a “separation ordinance” that limits city employees from inquiring about the immigration status or participating in enforcement of civil immigration issues. The city said its ordinance, approved in 2003, fully complies with federal law.

Yet the state’s GOP members of Congress, led by Rep. Peter Stauber, R-8^th District, have accused Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey of refusing to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement on deportations of undocumented immigrants and wrote the mayor a letter with their complaints.

The Republican lawmakers were provoked by comments Frey made during a Jan. 28 press conference with Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-5th District, who said Minneapolis is likely to be one of many cities “targeted for retribution” by the Trump administration.

At that Jan. 28 press conference, Frey said “our police officers will not be cooperating with federal law enforcement around federal immigration.”

The GOP lawmakers said Frey’s stance “threatens the ability of ICE to remove dangerous criminals” from the city’s streets.

Frey’s office said the mayor has not responded to the letter. But the city is prepared for any blowback. The City Council recently approved a resolution giving the city attorney’s office broader authority to challenge any federal actions.

St. Paul also adopted a separation ordinance in 2004 that said no city employee will ever take on the role of enforcing federal immigration policy or asking the immigration status of any resident in exchange for city services.

The city has also created an Immigration and Refugee Program in its city attorney’s office to help integrate immigrants into the community.

“Our city workers fight fires, investigate crimes, fill potholes, and provide safe spaces for youth with no regard to citizenship status,” St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter said in an emailed statement. “We’ve never had a role in enforcing federal immigration laws, nor asked for papers as a condition to receive city services, and we never will.” 

Requests, not commands   

In its lawsuit, the DOJ targeted New York for its “Green Light Law.” Signed by former Mayor Andrew Cuomo in 2019, this state law allows immigrants, regardless of their status, to receive driver’s licenses.

Applicants in New York can use foreign documents like birth certificates or passports to prove identity and the law limits data sharing with immigration enforcement agencies.

Bondi wants ICE to have access to New York’s driver’s license database. ICE has used state driver’s license databases to try to identify people in photos.

Minnesota’s Legislature approved a similar law in 2023 and it took effect last year. Like New York’s law, Minnesota’s driver’s license law prohibits the sharing of the license database with ICE, barring a court order. 

Besides New York and Minnesota, 17 other states allow undocumented immigrants to apply for driver’s licenses.

There’s another issue that has raised Trump’s ire.

A huge red flag in his first term in office was a state or local jurisdiction’s “detainer” policy. Detainers are requests from federal immigration officials for local authorities to detain immigrants in custody so ICE can pick them up for deportation.

Ellison was asked by Ramsey County whether it – or any other Minnesota county — can lawfully hold people in custody based on immigration detainers issued by federal authorities.

ICE considers Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin and Ramsey counties as “sanctuary counties” because they decline to hold immigrants on ICE detainers. 

In his response to Ramsey County, Ellison said Minnesota law prohibits law enforcement from holding someone on an immigration detainer if the person would otherwise be released from custody.

“Federal regulations themselves specify that detainers issued by ICE are requests, not commands, which federal courts around the country have also recognized,” Ellison wrote. “In addition, the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reserves all powers not given to the federal government to the states, prohibits the federal government from commandeering state and local officials to enforce federal regulatory programs.”

In the lawsuits against Illinois, Chicago, Cook County and New York, the Justice Department claimed the jurisdictions were violating the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law takes supremacy over state law.

Federal courts must now decide whether the 10th Amendment’s protections of state power or the Supremacy Clause will prevail when it comes to the enforcement of federal immigration laws. And that decision may ultimately be made by the conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court.

---

Editor’s note: Ana Radelat and Winter Keefer wrote this story for MinnPost.com. Radelat is MinnPost’s Washington, D.C., correspondent. Keefer is MinnPost’s metro reporter.

This article first appeared on MinnPost and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

MinnPost is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization whose mission is to provide high-quality journalism for people who care about Minnesota.