A judge says ICE blocked thousands from lawyers in Minnesota — and ordered the agency to stop rapid transfers

MINNEAPOLIS — A federal judge ordered U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to immediately ensure detainees in Minnesota have meaningful access to legal counsel after finding the agency effectively blocked thousands of people from speaking privately with attorneys during a recent enforcement surge, according to Reuters.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel’s order grew out of a lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward on behalf of detainees caught up in what the judge described as a system that moved people quickly, housed them in facilities not designed for longer stays, and created conditions where legal access was difficult or impossible. Brasel criticized ICE practices including the lack of private phone calls and fast transfers out of Minnesota without notice — moves that can sever attorney-client contact at the moment detainees are trying to challenge detention, seek bond, or pursue asylum-related claims.

The dispute centers on “Operation Metro Surge,” which Reuters reported involved rapid transfers and limited communication capabilities. The judge said the agency’s actions undercut detainees’ ability to exercise constitutional rights and ordered ICE to pause out-of-state transfers temporarily while ensuring confidential communication with lawyers.

The case also highlights a problem immigration lawyers have complained about for years: speed can be the point. When someone is moved repeatedly — sometimes across multiple states — it can become nearly impossible for attorneys to locate clients, meet deadlines, or prevent removals before courts can intervene. Reuters cited an example in the filings involving a 20-year-old asylum seeker who was moved between states without explanation and held far longer than a court had required.

ICE disputed that it had any formal policy to block legal access, but the judge found the real-world impact told a different story. Brasel’s order instructs the agency to allow private attorney calls and to ensure detainees can contact counsel in a way that is not monitored or exposed to others.

The ruling is temporary, valid for 14 days, but it lands during a period of intense legal pressure on immigration detention practices. The case is part of a broader class-action lawsuit, and it could influence how judges evaluate future challenges if rapid-transfer tactics are used elsewhere.

The practical stakes for detainees are immediate. Access to counsel can determine whether someone understands the charges against them, files the right paperwork in time, or presents evidence supporting asylum or relief claims. Even when detainees can technically “make calls,” the difference between a monitored line in a crowded space and a confidential attorney consultation can decide whether a person feels safe describing abuse, trafficking, or political persecution — issues that can form the backbone of an immigration case.

For ICE, the dispute raises operational questions about how detention surges are run. When arrests rise quickly, agencies often rely on short-term holding spaces and transfers to manage capacity. Brasel’s order signals that if legal access collapses under that pressure, judges may step in quickly and impose restrictions that limit how transfers can be used as a management tool.