Appeals court frees ICE to detain, arrest, pepper-spray Minnesota agitators

On Monday, a federal appeals court handed the Trump administration a key legal victory, putting a hold on restrictions that limited how US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents could respond to protesters and observers during immigration-enforcement operations in Minnesota.

In a brief order, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit stayed a preliminary injunction issued earlier this year by a federal district court in Minnesota. That injunction had curtailed ICE agents’ ability to arrest, detain, pepper-spray, or otherwise act against protesters in Minneapolis unless they had probable cause, as demonstrations and confrontations continued around immigration operations in the Twin Cities.

The lawsuit was brought by six individuals who said federal agents violated their civil rights while they were observing or protesting ICE activity tied to “Operation Metro Surge,” a multi-agency immigration enforcement effort in the region. In its ruling, the appeals court said it had reviewed the same video evidence cited by the district court and found it showed a wide range of conduct by protesters, some peaceful, some not, as well as varied responses by federal agents. The panel concluded that the lower court’s order was unlikely to survive appeal and should not remain in effect while the case moves forward.

The appeals court raised concerns that the injunction functioned as a de facto nationwide or “universal” injunction by extending protections beyond the six named plaintiffs to a broad, uncertified class of future protesters and observers. The judges said federal courts lack the authority to issue such sweeping relief, particularly where alleged incidents involve different officers, locations, and circumstances.

The panel also criticized portions of the injunction as overly vague, arguing that broad directives against “retaliation” or restrictions on vehicle stops could force officers in fast-moving situations to guess how their actions might later be judged by a court. Last week, the Eighth Circuit had already temporarily lifted the restrictions. Monday’s ruling made that relief permanent for the duration of the appeal, effectively restoring ICE agents’ discretion while the case continues, according to Fox News.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi praised the decision, accusing “liberal judges” of attempting to undermine federal law enforcement and endanger officers by limiting their response to what she described as violent agitators. She said the Justice Department had challenged the injunction and that the appeals court ultimately agreed it could not stand.

The original injunction was issued Jan. 16 by US District Judge Kate Menendez, who sided with the protesters. She found they were likely to succeed on claims that federal agents violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights during immigration enforcement operations. In her ruling, Menendez pointed to incidents in which ICE agents allegedly used pepper spray, pointed weapons, made arrests, and conducted traffic stops against individuals who were peacefully observing or protesting immigration enforcement activity.

The case will now proceed on an expedited schedule before the Eighth Circuit, which will ultimately decide whether the district court’s injunction should be reinstated or permanently struck down.