Minnesota challenges ICE deployment in a watershed 10th Amendment case

Minnesota has filed suit to block the Trump administration’s deployment of roughly 3,000 federal immigration agents in the state, arguing the operation violates state police powers and raises unprecedented 10th Amendment and equal sovereignty questions. The case also includes traditional claims about ICE overreach, but the key 10th Amendment arguments—relying on core state powers and the Shelby County equal sovereignty principle—are seen as novel and unlikely to prevail. The judge’s handling could affect how courts view federalism and executive power in immigration enforcement, with potential implications for how the federal government interacts with state governing powers.
- Minnesota raises unprecedented constitutional issues in its lawsuit against Trump administration anti-immigrant deployment The Conversation
- Judge orders Trump administration to address motives behind ICE's Minnesota operation ABC News
- Federal judge hears Minnesota's arguments for ending ICE surge PBS
- Minneapolis court considers whether Trump’s deployment of ICE agents violates constitution The Guardian
- Judge orders supplemental briefing in Minnesota's lawsuit over immigration enforcement operations kare11.com
Reading Insights
1
8
13 min
vs 14 min read
97%
2,774 → 96 words
Want the full story? Read the original article
Read on The Conversation