A federal judge has extended his order protecting Minnesota refugees from arrest or detention while the government reexamines their application for a green card.
The ruling, issued late Friday, Feb. 27, follows a Feb. 19 hearing where lawmakers, activists and attorneys gathered in the downtown Minneapolis U.S. District Court to argue for the extension of a previously granted temporary restraining order halting a campaign of arrests that began in January.
Under Operation PARRIS, federal agents claimed they needed to reexamine thousands of refugee applications for suspected fraud. Beginning in January, they detained, arrested and flew scores of Minnesota refugees to Texas detention centers without due process. Later that month, the Advocates for Human Rights and a group of refugees filed a class action lawsuit against the operation. On Jan. 28, U.S. District Judge John Tunheim granted a temporary restraining order preventing the government from detaining refugees based on the order until Feb. 25.
Friday’s preliminary injunction, in which Tunheim heavily criticized the government’s actions, extends that temporary restraining order for the duration of the case while it plays out in court.
“The Court will not allow federal authorities to use a new and erroneous statutory interpretation to terrorize refugees who immigrated to this country under the promise that they would be
welcomed and allowed to live in peace, far from the persecution they fled,” Tunheim said in his decision.
Arguing the case
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) first announced Operation PARRIS in a Jan. 9 press release, citing suspected fraud in the refugee admission program. The release said the initial focus of the operation would be 5,600 Minnesota refugees who had not yet obtained green cards, or legal permanent residency.
In the weeks following, immigration agents began detaining refugees on the streets, in their homes and at their required check-ins. Many were held in abysmal conditions at the Whipple Federal Building at Fort Snelling and then flown to detention centers in Texas before lawyers could file habeas petitions on their behalf.
According to Kathleen Motzenbecker, refugee services director at the Minnesota Council of Churches, around 150 refugees were detained during the operations.
The detentions came to a halt after Tunheim, a Clinton appointee, granted a temporary restraining order on Jan. 28.
“The refugees impacted by this Order are carefully and thoroughly vetted individuals who have been invited into the United States because of persecution in the countries from which they have come,” Tunheim said in the TRO. “They are not committing crimes on our streets, nor did they illegally cross the border.”
Since the TRO, immigration officials have continued to conduct intensive interviews with refugees at check-ins, which lawyers say is a tactic to manufacture fraud claims against them. Advocates also say the interviews are redundant and unnecessarily traumatizing, since refugees already go through a lengthy interview process when entering the country.
At the Feb. 19 hearing, lawyers representing Minnesota refugees argued to extend the protections of the TRO throughout the duration of the case.
Ahead of the court hearing, DHS released a memo on Feb. 18 saying that refugees applying for green cards must return to federal custody one year after they arrived in the U.S. The memo also said that DHS can keep refugees detained while the revetting and inspection process is conducted.
Kimberly Grano, staff attorney for the International Refugee Assistance Project, argued during the hearing that the memo attempted to retroactively justify the government’s position and was not backed by law. She also warned the policy would put over 100,000 legal refugees across the country at risk of mandatory detention.
At a news conference outside the federal courthouse in downtown Minneapolis following the hearing, lawyers, advocates and elected officials including U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar and Sen. Tina Smith, both D-Minn., condemned Operation PARRIS.
“Since the passage of the Refugee Act in 1980, refugees have been admitted to this country and applied for green cards after a year without incident,” Grano said. “Until January, at no time has the government claimed they are entitled to detain all refugees for days or weeks just because they didn’t apply exactly at the one-year mark.
“What we are seeing is the start of a national campaign to transform refugee status from something permanent to something the U.S. government can take away at whim,” she said.
Rep. Omar, who arrived in the U.S. with her family as asylum-seekers, said the operation deliberately targets vulnerable individuals.
“What horrifies me the most is that this is really just an excuse to traumatize and terrorize people who have already experienced unimaginable suffering and fear,” Omar said. “It is an excuse to drive people out of public life, to break people.”
Welcome relief
Tunheim’s decision on Friday will extend the protections granted in the temporary restraining order throughout the duration of the case.
In his decision, Tunheim heavily criticized the government’s claim that it had the right to mandatorily detain refugees after they had been present in the country for a year. He said the government violated a promise made in the Refugee Act to those fleeing persecution.
“Pass the vetting, follow the law, and you will be given a chance at a new beginning in safety,” Tunheim said. “That promise was not symbolic. It was concrete.
“The Government’s proposed new interpretation upends that commitment without clear authorization from Congress and rests on constitutionally precarious grounds,” he added.
In a news release, the plaintiffs expressed their gratitude for the judge’s decision.
“Refugees are legally admitted to this country and deserve legal protection. We are grateful that the Court issued its decision and is upholding the Constitution and the rule of law,” said Berger Montague’s E. Michelle Drake, who argued the case in front of Tunheim.
As federal immigration agents slowly withdraw from Minnesota, the court’s decision adds an additional layer of protections for refugees in the state.
While it’s unclear how long it will take for the lawsuit to play out in court, Grano said the decision comes as welcome relief.
“Minnesota refugees can now live their lives without fear that their own government will snatch them off the street and imprison them far from their loved ones,” she said. “As the Trump administration threatens to expand its terror campaign against refugees nationwide, this court’s decision is a clear rejection of these lawless actions.”
