A federal appeals court on Monday blocked a lower-court judge’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement tactics in Minnesota, handing the Trump administration a major win as protests and authorized challenges proceed to encompass federal immigration operations in the Twin Cities.
The eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an indefinite keep of a Jan. 16 order by U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez that sharply restricted how federal officers may reply to protests tied to ICE exercise in Minneapolis. The keep will stay in impact whereas the federal government’s attraction proceeds.
WIN AGAINST JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN MINNESOTA
Our nice @TheJusticeDept attorneys have now obtained a FULL STAY in this significant case.
Liberal judges tried to handcuff our federal regulation enforcement officers, limit their actions, and put their security in danger when responding to… https://t.co/j1kvm7gQGR
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) January 26, 2026
Attorney General Pam Bondi lauded the choice, saying decrease court judges like Menendez “tried to handcuff our federal law enforcement officers, restrict their actions, and put their safety at risk when responding to violent agitators.”
“The DOJ went to court. We got a temporary stay. NOW, the 8th Circuit has fully agreed that this reckless attempt to undermine law enforcement cannot stand,” Bondi mentioned.
That order by Menendez, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, had barred federal officers from arresting, detaining, pepper-spraying, or retaliating towards people engaged in what she described as peaceable and unobstructive protest exercise. It additionally restricted officers from stopping autos except that they had cheap suspicion that occupants had been forcibly interfering with immigration enforcement. The appeals court beforehand intervened on Wednesday with out issuing a written resolution.
In a short per curiam resolution Monday afternoon, the appeals court mentioned the federal government made a “strong showing” that the injunction is unlikely to outlive appellate evaluate. The panel concluded the order was each overly broad and impermissibly imprecise, elevating constitutional and sensible considerations.
The court mentioned the injunction successfully amounted to a common injunction by extending aid to a sweeping, uncertified class of protesters and observers. Citing current Supreme Court precedent, the panel mentioned federal courts lack authority to impose such broad restrictions on govt department operations.
The judges additionally faulted the order for failing to obviously outline the scope of conduct brokers can be prohibited from partaking in, concluding it largely directed federal officers to “obey the law.”
“Even the provision that singles out the use of ‘pepper-spray or similar nonlethal munitions and crowd dispersal tools’ requires federal agents to predict what the district court would consider ‘peaceful and unobstructive protest activity,’” the bulk wrote.
Such imprecise instructions, the court mentioned, depart brokers guessing how you can reply throughout fast-moving protest conditions and expose them to attainable contempt sanctions.
The ruling comes amid sustained protests in Minneapolis following two deadly encounters involving federal brokers. An ICE officer shot and killed Renee Good on Jan. 7, and a Border Patrol agent fatally shot Alex Pretti, a U.S. citizen, on Saturday throughout separate enforcement operations, in line with authorities. Both incidents fueled demonstrations and intensified scrutiny of Operation Metro Surge, a large-scale federal immigration enforcement effort in the Twin Cities.
President Donald Trump has escalated the federal response, putting roughly 1,500 U.S. troops on standby to help federal brokers and warning that he may invoke the Insurrection Act if unrest continues. However, he indicated a technique shift in communication with the state’s recalcitrant management on Monday, suggesting he and Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) spoke and had been on a “similar wavelength” with each other.
The underlying lawsuit, filed in December, alleges that federal officers violated the First and Fourth Amendment rights of six protesters. Plaintiffs declare brokers boxed in a civilian’s automobile and pointed a rifle inside throughout enforcement operations. They sought classwide aid on behalf of anybody who observes, data, or protests ICE exercise in Minnesota.
Menendez mentioned in her Jan. 16 order that protesters confirmed an “ongoing, persistent pattern” of intimidating conduct by ICE officers. She cited intensive media protection of aggressive federal responses to protests throughout the Twin Cities.
FEDERAL JUDGE SKEPTICAL OF MINNESOTA’S PLEA FOR COURT TO END SWEEPING DHS OPERATION
Although her injunction is now on pause, Menendez remains to be weighing a separate request from Minnesota officers to halt the broader deployment of federal immigration officers in the state. At a listening to Monday, she mentioned she was wrestling with the scope of the request however acknowledged that federal officers have “a lot of power” to implement immigration legal guidelines.
Minnesota argues the surge unconstitutionally interferes with the state’s authority and threatens public security. The appeals court, nevertheless, mentioned staying the injunction serves the general public curiosity by stopping federal brokers from hesitating whereas finishing up lawful duties.
