An appeals court on Wednesday reversed a lower court decision in Minnesota that placed severe restrictions on federal immigration agents when it comes to handling violent and disruptive agitators.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an administrative stay, pausing a lower court’s preliminary injunction that had limited the tactics used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents against protesters and “observers.”
Wednesday’s decision comes amid Operation Metro Surge, a large-scale immigration enforcement initiative launched by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in early December 2025, which has deployed over 3,000 federal agents to the Twin Cities area of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The operation has resulted in the arrest of more than 10,000 individuals, according to U.S. Border Patrol officials.
The case originated from a lawsuit filed on December 17, 2025, by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota on behalf of six plaintiffs who alleged violations of their First and Fourth Amendment rights while observing or protesting ICE activities. The plaintiffs claimed they were subjected to arrests, pepper spray, intimidation with firearms, and unjustified traffic stops without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
Federal immigration agents have been forced to deal with oftentimes violent mobs of “protesters” and “observers” who seek to obstruct federal law enforcement operations. Protests in the Twin Cities region intensified following the shooting of Renee Good, a local “ICE Watch” activist who attempted to run an agent over with her car.
On January 16, U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez, a Biden appointee, granted a preliminary injunction in part, finding that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claims of First Amendment retaliation and Fourth Amendment unreasonable seizures. The court claimed that the federal agents’ actions, including arrests without probable cause and the use of chemical irritants on peaceful observers, created a “chilling effect” on constitutional rights.
The DHS and Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed the injunction, arguing that it hindered agents’ ability to enforce immigration laws and protect themselves in potentially dangerous situations. Government lawyers contended that the order harmed “officers’ ability to protect themselves and the public in very dangerous circumstances.”
On Wednesday, five days after the lower court ruling, the St. Louis-based Eighth Circuit court granted the administrative stay in a brief, unsigned order without detailed reasoning.
This temporary pause halts the enforcement of Judge Menendez’s restrictions while the court considers whether to issue a longer-term stay during the full appeal process. The stay effectively allows ICE agents to operate without the imposed curbs on arrests, detentions, and use of non-lethal force against peaceful protesters and observers, at least for the time being.
“A liberal judge in Minnesota tried to handcuff ICE agents who are enforcing the Nation’s immigration laws and responding to obstructive and violent interference from agitators. The 8th Circuit just granted an administrative stay HALTING these restrictions, which were designed to undermine federal law enforcement,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“This DOJ will protect federal law enforcement agents from criminals in the streets AND activist judges in the courtroom.”
