Federal judge weighs contempt for U.S. Attorney over ICE property dispute
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 federal judge in St. Paul is expected to decide soon whether to hold U.S. Attorney Dan Rosen in contempt of court.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan ordered Rosen and one of his top deputies to appear personally and explain why Immigration and Customs Enforcement failed to follow orders to return personal belongings — such as car keys, driver’s licenses and work permits — to detainees.
Since the start of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement push in Minnesota — upwards of 1,000 people filed what are known as petitions of habeas corpus alleging that ICE illegally arrested them. Federal judges here ordered the vast majority of the detainees released, but lawyers for more than two dozen petitioners told Judge Jeffrey Bryan that ICE didn’t follow his orders to return belongings.
Attorney Rachel Engebretson said two of her clients have pending immigration claims and are in the United States legally. When ICE arrested and later released them both, she said, they did so without their driver’s licenses.
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.
“And that’s very concerning to several of my clients, who are choosing not to drive until their property is returned,” said Engebretson. “Because many of these clients can’t afford a misdemeanor conviction for something that’s beyond their control.”
After Engebretson said in court that ICE is returning her clients’ licenses, Bryan determined that the agency was in compliance with his order in those two cases.
At times, Tuesday’s daylong hearing was tense. It’s very rare for a U.S. Attorney — who’s appointed by the president and manages dozens of career government lawyers — to be summoned before a judge.
Bryan asked Rosen if he believes that the court has the power to enforce orders through civil contempt proceedings. Rosen responded, “Generally yes, but in this case no.”
Bryan pressed Rosen on whether ICE was disputing that it had received court orders to return detainees’ belongings. When Rosen interrupted, saying, “Your honor has made a mark smearing me,” Bryan cut him off. “You can’t talk over me,” the judge said.
After the exchange, tensions eased. Government attorneys and lawyers for the former detainees worked through a list of missing items and, by the afternoon, had resolved all but five cases.
Bryan called ICE deputy St. Paul field director Tauria Rich to the witness stand and peppered her with detailed questions about how the agency is supposed to keep track of detainees’ property.
“Can ICE just take property from detained people?” asked Bryan. “Put it in their pocket and go home? Steal it?”
“No they cannot,” Rich replied. “It’s in our code of ethics. Multiple people are working together when we process each alien.”
“I understand the statute uses that term,” said Bryan. “But we’re not talking about space aliens. We’re talking about people.“
U.S. Attorney Rosen conceded that ICE had lost property belonging to two of the petitioners, including a phone, headphones, car keys, wallet, work permit, and a driver’s license.
He said continuing to search for the items would be futile, and promised to make the petitioners whole. Rosen said later “There was no contempt of court. Not in one single order. There was no defiance, no disobedience.”
Attorney Sly Onyia went to court to retrieve his client’s passport. Outside the courthouse Onyia said it was remarkable that it took an eight-hour hearing and testimony from Minnesota’s top federal law enforcement official just to get ICE to abide by judicial orders.
“I think the message is clear. Hold the government accountable, and they’re not above the law,” said Onyia.
Judge Bryan did not order that U.S. Attorney Rosen and civil division chief David Fuller be held in contempt of court, but promised to have a decision soon.
