A federal judge is considering putting an end to a sweeping immigration operation in Minnesota where officers are allegedly going “door-to-door” and “hunting down” recently resettled refugees, including children, and sending them to detention camps in Texas.
The Trump administration launched Operation PARRIS earlier this month to exclusively target the state’s 5,600 new refugees, who are legally present in the country after an extensive vetting process but are not yet lawful permanent residents.
But Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have arrested them at immigration check-ins, on their way to work or school, and appeared at their doorstep without a warrant for their arrest, according to a recent class-action lawsuit.
“I fled my home country because I was facing government repression,” wrote a plaintiff identified as D. Doe, who said he was flown to Texas in shackles after he was abruptly arrested at his home earlier this month. “I can't believe it’s happening again here. It’s chilling and I'm scared.”
Lawyers for targeted refugees asked a judge on Monday to halt the operation, which they argue is fueled by the president’s “animus” towards Somali immigrants he has derided as “garbage” who “come from hell.”
The Twin Cities are home to roughly 80,000 people of Somali ancestry, the vast majority of whom are legal residents or American citizens. But the president — seizing on a series of fraud cases involving government programs where most of the defendants have roots in Somalia — surged officers into the state as part of his nationwide effort to deport millions of people.
In a statement announcing the operation, Homeland Security officials said Minnesota is “ground zero for the war on fraud.”
“This operation in Minnesota demonstrates that the Trump administration will not stand idly by as the U.S. immigration system is weaponized by those seeking to defraud the American people,” a spokesperson wrote. “American citizens and the rule of law come first, always.”
But lawyers for refugees argue that ICE is "intentionally and illegally terrorizing resettled refugees who are not accused of any wrongdoing,” according to a statement from Kimberly Grano, staff attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project.
“These are people who entered this country legally under affirmative refugee programs,” attorney Michelle Drake told District Judge John R. Tunheim Monday.
“They were vetted before they got here,” she added. “Many people live in refugee camps in other countries for years, waiting for their admission to the United States. They undergo extensive background screening, even biometric screening, before they come to this country, they're given work authorization. These are people who are working with us.”
The Independent has requested comment from Homeland Security.
The plaintiffs in the case were admitted to the U.S. through the Refugee Admissions Program “after undergoing painstaking vetting processes and waiting years for safe resettlement,” according to the lawsuit.
They aren’t subject to any deportation orders and are not considered a flight risk, “yet they have been detained or are at imminent risk of detention” because Homeland Security officials “arbitrarily determined, without any rational basis or legal authority, to intimidate and terrorize the refugees of Minnesota” because they were admitted under President Joe Biden’s administration, lawyers wrote.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is reviewing thousands of refugees who were lawfully admitted to the country under former President Biden while Homeland Security officials broadly cancel legal protections for roughly 1 million immigrants who entered the country in that time.
President Trump has directed an overhaul of the nation’s refugee admissions program last year to study whether allowing refugees into the country was even in the interest of the U.S.
Shortly after Trump entered office, the administration abruptly canceled previously arranged refugee flights. In the months that followed, the administration slashed financial aid and healthcare coverage for refugees, and the president’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act restricts refugees from eligibility for Medicaid, Medicare, children’s health insurance and emergency food assistance.
In May, a group of 59 white South Africans were admitted to the U.S. as “refugees,” and the country “essentially extended citizenship” to them, Trump said at the time.
The administration is drastically reducing the number of refugees admitted into the country each year and reserving most of what remains of those limited slots for white South Africans. The move represents a stark break from long-standing refugee policy informed by humanitarian needs, not ideology or identity, according to refugee resettlement groups.
Refugee admissions are now explicitly prioritizing Afrikaners for resettlement, and the ceiling for admissions has been radically reduced from 125,000 people to only 7,500 for the year.
"The federal government is tearing refugees from their homes and communities, shattering their hard-won safety and security,” according to Michele Garnett McKenzie with Advocates for Human Rights, which is the organizational plaintiff in the Minnesota case.
“International and U.S. law are clear — we have a legal and moral obligation to protect individuals who face persecution, not expose them to imprisonment, isolation, coercion, and abuse,” she said. “The government must cease these illegal actions that undermine the commitment we made to these refugees, causing grave harm to individuals, families, and communities.”
Trump world roasted by Jon Stewart, CNN after apparently abandoning Second Amendment
Trump is a bigger threat to Nato than Putin, says alliance’s former commander
Tourism in Cuba plummets as tensions with US increase and Venezuela oil shipments drop
Could RFK Jr’s push to reshape America’s diet save the Republicans in the midterms?
Rupert Murdoch sends unsubtle message to Trump to stop the madness in Minneapolis
ICE plans to be camped out at the Super Bowl looking for migrants
