Months before immigration agents flooded into Minnesota, the Trump administration outlined its grievances against state and local officials in a lawsuit that accused them of engaging in “an active and deliberate effort to obstruct federal immigration enforcement.”
The claims in that lawsuit, which remains unresolved, have been echoed by President Trump and his allies in recent weeks as some 3,000 agents descended on the state, where they have arrested thousands, clashed with residents and shot three people.
The Trump administration is correct that certain state and local policies limit cooperation on immigration enforcement, yet the details of those policies are complex and vary depending on location. The Democrats who lead Minnesota have defended their limits on cooperating with federal agents as lawful and in line with the state’s values.
The reality is that Minnesota’s state and local governments have a patchwork of rules that go much further to limit coordination on immigration than in many Republican-led states, but stop short of the comprehensive statewide restrictions on cooperation in other Democratic-run states like California, Illinois and Oregon.
As political and legal fights continue, here’s what you should know about Minnesota’s immigration policies:
State prisons coordinate with ICE
Minnesota prisons routinely hand over inmates who are in the country illegally to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents when they complete their sentences.
Under Minnesota law, the state’s Department of Corrections must notify ICE officials when an immigrant convicted of a felony is set to be released. Last year, prison officials turned over to ICE 84 inmates who had finished sentences and were leaving the prison system, according to the state agency.
Prison officials said they had been exasperated — and confused — by the Trump administration’s claims that they have not cooperated.
County jails are a source of federal frustration
Federal officials have repeatedly complained that Minnesota jails release people who don’t have authorization to be in the United States with little or no effort to transfer them to federal custody. But some in the state have raised concerns about whether it is appropriate for jails to hand over people whose criminal cases are still pending.
While Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, explicitly bans coordinating with ICE on civil immigration enforcement, there is no such ban for the rest of the state’s county jails.
Still, official opinions issued by Minnesota’s attorney general, Keith Ellison, have said that sheriffs cannot hold people wanted by ICE longer than they would otherwise be jailed. That can prove to be a logistical challenge for federal officials, who have said that Mr. Ellison’s opinion had contributed to little or no cooperation at several jails.
Sheriffs in at least seven of Minnesota’s 87 counties have signed agreements to collaborate with ICE on immigration enforcement, a step that Mr. Ellison, a Democrat, has said is allowed as long as the county’s board of commissioners has signed off. A few jails in the state have contracts to provide beds for immigrants in ICE custody. But in many counties, there is no explicit policy on coordinating with ICE.
There might be room for negotiation
James Stuart, the executive director of the Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association, said sheriffs were working to address concerns raised by federal officials in hopes of seeing fewer immigration agents operating on Minnesota streets in the days ahead. He described recent meetings with Tom Homan, the White House border czar who is leading the Minnesota crackdown, as productive. Mr. Stuart is also President Trump’s nominee for U.S. marshal in Minnesota.
Conversations remain a work in progress, Mr. Stuart said, and any agreements to hold detainees for federal officials would require the approval of a county’s elected board.
Mr. Stuart said that the agreements under consideration, known as Basic Ordering Agreements, would apply to people arrested on local charges, wanted for immigration violations and slated to be released. Those people could remain in jail for up to 48 hours beyond their expected release times, Mr. Stuart said, but during that time would become federal detainees in the custody of the local sheriff rather than local detainees.
Not everyone is on board. The Hennepin County attorney, Mary Moriarty, said in a statement that she believed such agreements would violate state law. And Sheriff Dawanna Witt of Hennepin County, who runs the state’s largest jail, said on Wednesday that local jail officials should not be in the business of civil immigration enforcement.
A spokesman for Mr. Ellison’s office declined to comment specifically on Basic Ordering Agreements, saying the office “can’t provide legal punditry or speculation.”
Minnesota officials were also discussing ways to improve communication with federal officials, Mr. Stuart said.
The Twin Cities have sweeping protections for immigrants
The federal government’s complaints about Minnesota go beyond prisons and jails. Its lawsuit singles out city ordinances in Minneapolis and St. Paul, the state’s two largest cities, that bar local police officers from cooperating with civil immigration enforcement and that mostly prevent city workers from inquiring about a person’s immigration status.
Supporters of such policies say that they do not interfere with immigration enforcement, but leave that work to federal officials. Those limits, they argue, help to build trust with residents who might otherwise not feel comfortable coming forward with information about a crime.
“This clear delineation keeping police and city officials separate from civil immigration enforcement removes the chill from talking to the police,” lawyers for St. Paul said in a court filing that asked a judge to dismiss the federal government’s lawsuit.
The state government has a more piecemeal approach
On the state level, Minnesota has passed some laws granting protections for undocumented immigrants, but has stopped short of broader policies that some Democrats would prefer.
In 2023, Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, signed into law a measure allowing undocumented immigrants to get Minnesota driver’s licenses, and state law prevents officials from sharing information about a driver’s immigration status.
But Democrats have not succeeded in passing sweeping, statewide sanctuary protections similar to the local policies in Minneapolis and St. Paul and in some other states.
In 2024, Sandra Feist, a Democratic state lawmaker, introduced a bill that sought to bar local law enforcement officials from playing a role in the enforcement of immigration laws. The bill failed. A Republican-backed measure seeking to bar sheriffs from adopting policies that restrict cooperation with ICE also has not passed.
“We’re definitely not a runaway train on immigrant rights here in Minnesota,” said Ms. Feist, who is also an immigration lawyer. “Minnesota does not have political makeup to pass that type of legislation at this time.”
Mitch Smith is a Chicago-based national correspondent for The Times, covering the Midwest and Great Plains.
The post What Is Minnesota’s Policy on Cooperating With Federal Immigration Enforcement? appeared first on New York Times.
