Federal Judge Dismisses Civil Rights Suit Against ICE

The case was the first known lawsuit filed against ICE over Operation Metro Surge. Activists confronted a group of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in the largely Somali neighborhood of Cedar-Riverside in Minneapolis, Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2025. (AP Photo/Mark Vancleave) MINNEAPOLIS (CN) — A federal judge on Friday tossed a class action brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Minnesotans targeting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement over its agents’ tactics during Operation Metro Surge. In her 27-page order , U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez said the class could not show standing, as the operation has since wrapped up and there is little threat of imminent or ongoing harm. “These facts collapse the pillars on which plaintiffs’ standing for the preliminary injunction order was built,” the Joe Biden appointee said in the order. She noted the plaintiff citizens were “less likely to be out protesting at-large immigration enforcement activities when fewer of those actions are taking place.” In its original case , filed back in December 2025, the ACLU outlined what it said were constitutional violations of observers and bystanders by federal immigration agents. The ACLU claimed ICE agents pepper sprayed, intimidated and directed excessive force toward Minnesotans who were not the target of any enforcement operation. Menendez noted in her order the circumstances surrounding the initial complaint were unique to Minnesota. ICE officers had swarmed the streets of the Twin Cities, stopping individuals on the street or in cars whom they suspected were undocumented. These actions drew crowds of protesters, who showed up at ICE operations to document and protest their activities. They followed agents from one scene to the next. “In response to these protests and observer activity, the agents allegedly pulled over, detained, pepper sprayed or otherwise retaliated against plaintiffs, violating their First and Fourth Amendment rights,” Menendez said in the order. The lead plaintiff was Susan Tincher, a 55-year-old Minneapolis resident who claims she was tackled, handcuffed and held in a cell for five hours by federal agents after she approached and asked if they were ICE officials. Her story echoed those of others who joined the suit. Menendez initially granted a preliminary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs — though the Eighth Circuit later repealed that . Nearly a month after the injunction order, the ACLU filed an amended complaint . The group added three journalists to the suit and included more than 100 declarations from community members accusing ICE agents of unconstitutional retaliation. At the time, federal officials were taking major steps to draw down the surge — transitioning them from at-large operations in Minneapolis to targeted prison and jail arrests and transporting a significant number of federal agents away from the state. Referencing those decisions and the relative calm since then, Menendez said there is little chance any of the plaintiffs would be again subject to the harm they suffered over the winter. Menendez appeared skeptical of the government’s motion to dismiss during a hearing in May , as the Trump administration never admitted any wrongdoing or provided formal guarantees operations would not resume. Now, four more months of continued inaction appears to have calmed her concerns. She granted one plaintiff leave to amend. That plaintiff, Ryan Doxsey, claimed ICE agents told him he “would be added to a list of domestic terrorists.” Despite the dismissal, Menendez left the door open for the class to reintroduce legal action should new circumstances or injuries arise, such as if the government resuming operations in Minnesota. At the May hearing, federal attorneys argued any future law enforcement operation in Minnesota would likely be completely different, with new guidelines and goals, and would require separate legal action. As the Operation Metro Surge mo