Minnesota immigration crackdown faces possible temporary pause by U.S. judge

A federal judge heard arguments Monday on whether to temporarily halt the federal immigration operation in Minnesota after two recent fatal shootings involving federal officers; a separate hearing on preserving evidence is also scheduled and the timing of any ruling is unclear.

A federal judge in Minnesota began hearing arguments Monday on whether to halt, at least temporarily, a recent federal immigration enforcement operation. The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul sued the Department of Homeland Security after two recent shootings that involved federal immigration officers and sought to restore enforcement levels to those before the December surge. State lawyers told the court the situation on the street requires a pause, and Justice Department attorneys asked the judge to reject the request or stay any order pending appeal. Another federal judge issued an order to preserve evidence tied to one of the shootings, and a related hearing is scheduled in St. Paul. Key developments: - Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul sued the Department of Homeland Security and asked the court to reduce the number of federal officers to pre-surge levels and narrow the operation's scope. - U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez questioned how to draw a line between legitimate law enforcement and actions that would violate the Constitution. - The Justice Department called the lawsuit legally frivolous and sought to block or stay any court order while it appeals. - A separate federal judge ordered that evidence connected to a recent shooting not be destroyed or altered; a hearing in that case is scheduled in St. Paul. - Attorneys general from 19 states and the District of Columbia filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota. Summary: The court heard arguments Monday on whether to pause the federal immigration enforcement effort in Minnesota after two recent fatal shootings involving federal officers. A separate hearing on evidence preservation is set in St. Paul, and the timing of any final ruling by the judge is undetermined at this time.