Federal Judge Extends Blocks on DHS Policy to Detain Minnesota Refugees

A federal judge on Feb. 27 extended an order that blocked immigration enforcement from detaining refugees in Minnesota under a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy to reexamine refugee cases.

Judge John R. Tunheim of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota issued a preliminary injunction extending a January order that was set to expire on Feb. 25.

The order stems from a class action lawsuit brought in January by lawfully resettled refugees who are not yet lawful permanent residents. It sought to block a new policy the DHS dubbed Operation Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening.

In a 66-page ruling issued on Feb. 27, Tunheim said the court “will not allow federal authorities to use a new and erroneous statutory interpretation to terrorize refugees who immigrated to this country under the promise that they would be welcomed and allowed to live in peace, far from the persecution they fled.”

Tunheim questioned the legality of the new policy, noting that refugees who were thoroughly vetted and lawfully admitted to the United States should not be subject to arrest or detention, even though they have not yet obtained lawful permanent resident status.

The judge said the new DHS policy turned the “refugees’ American Dream into a dystopian nightmare,” noting that it lacked authorization from Congress and raised “serious constitutional concerns.”

“Why subject them to warrantless arrests, place them in shackles, and transport them to distant detention facilities—facilities whose conditions likely resemble the refugee camps they once lived in—simply to conduct the required one-year interview that precedes adjustment to lawful permanent resident status?” the judge wrote.

“Why? The Government suggests that they are looking for terrorists, but there is not a shred of evidence in the record that the Named Plaintiffs or the putative Class they seek to represent pose serious national security risks.”

Tunheim emphasized that refugees are not immigrants who entered the country illegally, noting that they underwent extensive vetting before being granted “conditional admission” to the United States.

Kimberly Grano, staff attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project, which represents the plaintiffs, said in a statement that the injunction would allow refugees in Minnesota to live their daily lives without fear of being detained by federal authorities.

The court’s decision is a “clear rejection” of what Grano called “lawless actions.”

“As the Trump administration threatens to expand its terror campaign against refugees nationwide, this court’s decision is a clear rejection of these lawless actions,” Grano said in a statement.

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, a DHS spokesperson defended immigration enforcement actions and said that all ICE detainees receive due process.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducts enforcement operations in line with the U.S. Constitution and all applicable federal laws,” the spokesperson said. “Any claims made by detainees are heard before an immigration judge.”

DHS launched the policy initiative in Minnesota in January, calling it “a sweeping initiative” to reexamine thousands of refugee cases through new background checks and intensive verification of refugee claims.

The department said in January that about 5,600 refugees in the state have not yet received lawful permanent resident status.