"The lawsuit sought a quick order to halt the enforcement action or limit its scope. Lawyers with the U.S. Department of Justice have called the lawsuit "legally frivolous." The ruling on the injunction focused on the argument by Minnesota officials that the federal government is violating the Constitution's 10th Amendment, which limits the federal government's powers to infringe on the sovereignty of states."
"State and local officials argued that the surge is retaliation after the federal government's initial attempts to withhold federal funding to try to force immigration cooperation failed. "Because there is evidence supporting both sides' arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side's competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction.""
Judge Katherine M. Menendez denied a preliminary injunction sought by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and the mayors of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The plaintiffs argued Department of Homeland Security actions violate constitutional protections and that the enforcement surge infringes state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment. The court found the likelihood of success on the 10th Amendment claim insufficient to justify an injunction. The federal government asserted Operation Metro Surge aims to remove criminal immigrants and counter state and local sanctuary policies. State and local officials described the surge as retaliatory after failed federal attempts to withhold funding. Two people were fatally shot by federal officers in Minneapolis.
Read at www.npr.org
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]