On Monday, Minnesota, along with the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, filed a sweeping lawsuit against the Trump administration over a massive increase in immigration raids across the Twin Cities. The legal action comes just days after the fatal shooting of Renee Good.
At the center of the lawsuit is a surge that brought at least 2,100 ICE officers and Homeland Security investigators into Minnesota. According to state officials, that surge disrupted communities, frightened families, and escalated tensions in already vulnerable neighborhoods.
Now, Minnesota is asking a federal judge to step in, halt the operation, and prevent similar actions from happening again.
Minnesota Sues the Trump Administration Over Immigration Raids After Renee Good’s Death
The lawsuit was filed by Attorney General Keith Ellison on behalf of the state, alongside Minneapolis and St. Paul.
It names several high-ranking federal officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, ICE Director Todd Lyons, and Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino. According to the complaint, the Trump administration’s actions caused what Ellison describes as “serious harm” to Minnesota residents.
State leaders argue the immigration surge was not only disruptive but unlawful. The lawsuit claims the deployment violated constitutional limits by forcing state and local institutions to absorb the impact of federal enforcement decisions without consent.
The shooting of Renee Good is cited as a pivotal example of how federal presence intensified already volatile conditions. Officials say her death underscored the risks created when armed federal agents flood civilian neighborhoods with little coordination or oversight.
Rather than increasing safety, Minnesota leaders say the surge destabilized schools, strained local law enforcement, and left communities on edge.
Lawsuit Calls ICE Surge “Unconstitutional and Unlawful”
The legal complaint pulls no punches.
According to the lawsuit, the surge of federal law enforcement officers into Minnesota violated both constitutional principles and federal law. State attorneys argue the operation ignored limits placed on federal power and trampled state sovereignty.
The lawsuit specifically challenges the scale and tactics of the operation. It claims federal agents carried out warrantless arrests, engaged in racial profiling, and used excessive force during enforcement actions.
State officials also argue that Minnesota was unfairly targeted.
They say the surge was not random. Instead, they claim it was politically motivated, pointing to Minnesota’s diversity, its voting record, and its policy disagreements with the federal government.
According to the filing, the result was chaos.
Schools reported fear among students and parents. Local police departments faced confusion over jurisdiction and responsibility. Courts were disrupted. Entire neighborhoods felt surveilled.
Keith Ellison Says Minnesota Was Targeted for Its Diversity and Democracy
Attorney General Ellison did not mince words.
“We allege that the obvious targeting of Minnesota for our diversity, for our democracy and our differences of opinion with the federal government is a violation of the Constitution and of federal law,” said Ellison.
He continued, “We allege that the surge’s reckless impact on our schools, on our local law enforcement, is a violation of the 10th Amendment and the sovereign laws and powers of the Constitution grants to states. We allege that DHS forces use of excessive and lethal force, their warrantless racist arrests, their targeting of our courts.”
Those statements sit at the heart of the lawsuit.
Ellison argues that Minnesota has the right to govern itself without being overrun by federal enforcement actions that undermine local authority. He says the Constitution draws clear boundaries, and those boundaries were crossed.