A federal judge heard arguments in St. Paul on Wednesday about whether the Department of Homeland Security must limit immigration enforcement near school grounds.
The lawsuit, filed in February by Fridley Public Schools, Duluth Public Schools and Education Minnesota, challenges the 2025 revocation of a longstanding federal policy classifying schools as well as hospitals and places of worship as sensitive locations where immigration enforcement should be avoided as much as possible. The Department of Homeland Security rescinded that policy, a version of which was first implemented in 1993 and was most recently updated in 2021, on the first day of President Donald Trump’s second term.
Then, during Operation Metro Surge, schools throughout Minnesota reported widespread sightings of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents near schools and on school property. In one instance, Border Patrol agents came onto the grounds of Roosevelt High School in Minneapolis, deployed chemical munitions on staff and students, and tackled and choked an educator. Other schools reported ICE staging for raids in their parking lots, pointing guns at teachers, and detaining parents at school bus stops. School attendance plummeted as students and parents stayed home out of fear.
“For the last several months, educators have struggled mightily to shield students, to provide a sense of normalcy, and to fulfill their mission to educate our children,” said Amanda Cialkowski, an attorney for the plaintiffs, during her opening argument. “That job has been made exponentially more difficult by the revocation of the sensitive locations policy and immigration enforcement action that followed.”
U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino questioned whether the enforcement activities near schools could be attributed to the changed sensitive locations policy, or to increased immigration enforcement during Operation Metro Surge. She also asked whether the plaintiffs still had standing now that federal authorities say that Operation Metro Surge has concluded.
Cialkowski said the harms arose from the change in the sensitive locations policy, not from Operation Metro Surge. She also pointed to declarations from parents of ICE sightings near schools since the conclusion of Operation Metro Surge.
“Metro Surge was the megaphone that publicized the change in the policy,” Cialkowski said. “It was not in and of itself the harm. It really is the change in the policy that causes the harm.”
Provinzino noted that the previous policy still allowed for immigration enforcement at schools under extreme circumstances or with a supervisor’s approval.
“Legally, I’m not sure that going back to the 2021 policy changes anything, unless immigration enforcement in and of itself is reduced,” she said.
Cialkowski said that immigration authorities could accomplish their enforcement goals outside of schools. She pointed to the absence of examples of immigration enforcement activity at or near schools in the previous 30 years.
“The fact that it wasn’t happening shows the government was complying with the policy,” she said. “If it was possible to avoid it, they did.”
Cialkowski said that the educators she represented wanted to be able to reassure her students when children asked whether they were safe at school.
“They cannot say yes anymore, and that completely links to the policy change,” she said.
Sean Ouellette, another attorney for the schools and union, focused on the Administrative Procedure Act, the law that the plaintiffs allege the government violated when it changed its sensitive locations policy.
Ouellette argued that the government had not followed proper procedures. To change this policy legally, he said, the government would have to address the original reasons for the prior policy, consider whether someone might be hurt by a change to a policy they previously relied on, and consider alternatives within the scope of the prior policy.
But the government did none of those things, Ouellette said.
“For all those reasons, the action is arbitrary and capricious,” he said.
Jessica Lundberg, an attorney for the Department of Justice, questioned the standing for both the school districts and the union.
“There is no legally cognizable injury in fact for any of the plaintiffs,” she said. “What we are talking about is a chilling effect on third parties.”
Lundberg also said there was a low likelihood of future harm, given the drawdown of federal agents from Operation Metro Surge.
Provinzino noted statements filed in court about the decreased number of officers. “But I don’t see any statement that the government is choosing to forego enforcement activity near these protected spaces,” she said.
Lundberg acknowledged the government had made no promises in that regard. “I don’t think that affects the analysis because there was always the possibility of immigration enforcement in and around schools even with the previous memorandum,” she said.
She said the schools and union had misread the previous memorandum to believe they would never encounter an immigration agent at or near a school.
“Even if it hasn’t happened in 30 years?” Provinzino questioned.
“That is what I’m arguing today,” Lundberg said.
Lundberg said the government wanted to emphasize that “swapping out the 2025 memorandum for the 2021 memorandum will not have a meaningful impact on the immigration enforcement activity plaintiffs are complaining about today.”
Cialkowski, in closing arguments, disputed this point.
“If you see the myriad examples in the declaration, including ICE pulling up in front of an elementary school and blasting ‘Ice Ice Baby’ on their radio, there is no world in which that would have been permitted under the prior policy,” she said. “Yanking people out of their cars, including U.S. citizens with passports, that would not have been permitted under the prior policy.”
Provinzino thanked both sides as she dismissed court for the day.
“I am a daughter and granddaughter of educators, so this is an important case to me,” she said.
She said she would rule as quickly as possible, “but I want to make sure I get it right.”
‘Some notion of safety’
After the hearing, Cialkowski praised Provinzino’s preparedness and declined to speculate on how she would rule.
Brenda Lewis, the superintendent for Fridley Public Schools, expressed hope that the judge would reinstate the sensitive locations policy.
“For our school district, it would really be about some notion of safety coming back,” she said. In her small district, 72 students still have not returned to school after staying home in fear, she said. “We are not able to say to our students and families, we’re safe now.”
John Magas, the superintendent for Duluth Public Schools, said that he’d had many conversations with students, families, and staff about possible immigration enforcement at school well before the beginning of Operation Metro Surge.
Though fears have lessened since the drawdown of federal agents, the threat remained, he said.
“The change in guidelines is intentional to create a situation of chaos and fear and panic,” he said. “Until those measures are back in place, we still have to stand at the ready.”
