Hennepin County disputes federal claims about jail holds of targeted immigrants
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
A sharply worded Friday court filing on behalf of Hennepin County Sheriff Dawana Witt refutes federal government arguments about how the jail must handle holds of immigrants being targeted for deportation.
The filing is part of the county’s effort to dismiss a lawsuit over perceived sanctuary policies that limit local coordination with immigration enforcement. The 18-page document stresses that local entities aren’t obligated to honor civil immigration detainers, which are requests to hold people beyond a normal release date to facilitate a handover to federal agents.
“Congress did not require state and local governments to hold individuals without a judicial warrant,” Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Alan Martinson wrote in the filing on behalf of Witt, a named defendant in an ongoing Department of Justice lawsuit.
The Trump administration is challenging state and local laws that it says hinder immigration enforcement. The entities being sued argue that the 10th Amendment provides a separation from federal directives when it comes to immigration, allowing each locality to use discretion.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office previously offered a legal opinion telling counties that they risk civil liability if they hold people beyond their release date.
A declaration in early February from Samuel J. Olson, the field office director in St. Paul for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, contends that failure by Minnesota counties to honor detainers “have forced ICE to conduct more at-large arrests instead of secure transfers from local custody.”
Olson also said in the sworn statement that the standoff has led to tense encounters across the Twin Cities between officers and demonstrators, and that it amounts to discrimination against immigration officers.
The new Hennepin County filing pushes back on that narrative.
It says “the Olson declaration merely shows the disastrous effects of the federal government’s own actions in sending masked, undertrained officers to Minnesota and openly condoning their lawless conduct. The federal government’s position is akin to storming out of a cafe because the owner refused to share the wifi password, punching a bystander on the sidewalk and blaming the cafe owner for the consequences.”
Lawyers for Minneapolis also moved Friday to dismiss the lawsuit in relation to the city because it doesn’t operate a jail and therefore has no role in the dispute.
This story is part of our live coverage. Go to live updates.
