Court Makes Emergency Ruling on ICE Operations in Minnesota
Judge Refuses To Halt ICE Ops in Minnesota Amid Legal Challenge
A federal judge on Wednesday declined to immediately block the Trump administration’s intensified immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota, saying there was insufficient time to fully consider legal arguments in the state’s request for a temporary restraining order.
Advertisement
U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez, a Biden appointee, heard arguments in a lawsuit filed earlier this week by the State of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, which sought to halt a surge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agents conducting sweeps across the state. Plaintiffs allege the federal campaign has involved warrantless arrests, excessive force, and violations of constitutional rights.
Menendez said at a hearing that she could not issue a ruling on Wednesday due to the complexity of legal issues and limited precedent addressing the scope of federal immigration enforcement authority in this context.
The judge set deadlines for the U.S. Justice Department to respond by Jan. 19 and for state officials to file additional arguments by Jan. 22, with a ruling on the restraining order expected later this month.
“That should not be taken as a prejudgment of the merits of either the plaintiff’s case or the anticipated defense that may be raised by the United States,” Menendez said. “It is simply observing that these are grave and important matters and that they are somewhat frontier issues in constitutional law.”
Advertisement
State officials, including Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, argued federal agents have engaged in heavy-handed tactics that have eroded public trust and endangered residents. Government attorneys countered that officials have had limited time to respond to the lawsuit and that the operations are lawful and necessary.
Advertisement
Also, there is limited precedent from federal courts that reign in federal agents and agencies from performing their constitutional and statutory duties anywhere in the United States or U.S. possessions.
The lawsuit comes amid heightened tensions in Minneapolis following the Jan. 7 shooting death of Renee Good by an ICE agent during an enforcement action, which sparked widespread protests and scrutiny of federal tactics. Federal agencies have made thousands of arrests statewide since the operation began in December.
For now, the immigration sweeps will continue while the court weighs whether to impose restrictions or halt the activities.
Meanwhile, immigration enforcement may be ramping up at the Hennepin County Medical Center, the state’s largest public safety net hospital, and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.
MPR News reported on Wednesday that ICE agents were entering hospitals with detainees, sometimes without warrants, and – according to five Hennepin Healthcare nurses who requested to remain anonymous – were attending patient appointments.
Additionally, an anonymous employee at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport shared a memo with FOX 9 outlining plans for ICE agents to spend three weeks at the airport checking the documents of travelers and employees.
Federal officials also say that the ICE agent who fatally shot Renee Good during a chaotic encounter in Minneapolis last week suffered internal bleeding to the torso, a revelation that bolsters claims that the officer acted in self-defense.
Sources briefed on the agent’s medical condition told reporters that the injury occurred when Good’s vehicle struck the officer, identified as Jonathan Ross, a 10-year law enforcement veteran. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed the internal injury but declined to release additional medical details, citing privacy concerns.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said earlier that Ross had been treated at a local hospital immediately following the January 7 shooting and was released the same day. “The officer was hit by the vehicle. She hit him. He went to the hospital. A doctor did treat him. He has been released,” Noem said at the time, adding that Ross “acted to protect himself and his fellow agents.”
'Guilty Of Fraud' - Hammer Dropped On Former First Lady Jill Biden During Live Fox News Segment
McEnany Accuses Jill Biden Of Misleading Americans About Debate Performance
Posted July 15, 2026
Former White House press secretary and Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany accused former first lady Jill Biden of misleading the American public about President Joe Biden’s condition following his widely criticized debate performance during the 2024 campaign.
McEnany made the remarks Thursday during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” where she reacted to comments Jill Biden reportedly made in her upcoming book regarding the president’s performance during the debate that ultimately intensified questions about his age and fitness for office.
The discussion began when co-host Dana Perino referenced remarks Jill Biden made immediately following the debate.
At a campaign event after the debate, Jill Biden praised her husband’s performance.
“Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question,” she said at the time.
Perino contrasted those comments with more recent claims attributed to Jill Biden and raised questions about the apparent inconsistency.
“So now we know that this is what she’s saying in her book,” Perino said. “And the question I would love to ask her is where are you lying then or now?”
McEnany responded by arguing that Jill Biden’s reaction following the debate was inconsistent with her more recent descriptions of the event.
“It’s a great question,” McEnany said.
“That is not the reaction of someone who believes they just watched their husband have a stroke. It is an absolute lie.”
McEnany then accused the former first lady of concealing concerns about the president’s condition from voters.
“It was fraud,” she said.
“What she did fraud on the American public and she’s continuing it by saying she had never seen him like that before or after.”
The debate between Biden and President Donald Trump became a turning point in the 2024 election cycle, with many Democrats publicly expressing concern about Biden’s performance and his ability to continue his campaign.
Questions about Biden’s age and mental sharpness had circulated for years, but the debate intensified those concerns and fueled calls from some Democrats for him to step aside.
During the Fox News discussion, McEnany referenced comments previously made by veteran journalist Carl Bernstein regarding Biden’s condition behind the scenes.
“Dana, you all remember Carl Bernstein, who said he talked to people who knew Joe Biden, loved Joe Biden, supported Joe Biden, and they were adamant that what we saw was not a one-off,” McEnany said.
According to McEnany, Bernstein reported that individuals close to Biden had observed similar episodes before the debate.
“They said it had happened 15 or 20 times prior, him losing his train of thought,” she said.
McEnany also cited a fundraiser Bernstein reportedly described.
“He described a fundraiser where he froze up and seemed to have some type of rigor mortis,” she said.
“This is not something that was a one-off.”
McEnany argued that concerns about Biden’s condition were widely known among those close to him.
“This was well known,” she said.
She then questioned why Jill Biden continued publicly defending her husband following the debate.
“So why did she keep up with the fraud on the American people?” McEnany asked.
The former first lady has repeatedly defended her husband and rejected claims that she or members of his inner circle concealed concerns about his health, Breitbart News reported.
The debate over Biden’s condition became one of the defining political stories of the 2024 election cycle and continued after he ultimately left the race.
McEnany’s comments reflect ongoing scrutiny surrounding what Biden’s family, advisers and top Democratic officials knew about his condition and when they knew it.
Neither Jill Biden nor representatives for the former president immediately responded to McEnany’s latest remarks.
As new books and accounts from those involved continue to emerge, questions surrounding Biden’s final campaign and the decisions made by those closest to him remain a major topic of political debate.
