Connect with us

Midwest

When anti-ICE clashes trigger federal intervention: Experts explain the constitutional breaking point

Published

on

When anti-ICE clashes trigger federal intervention: Experts explain the constitutional breaking point

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Anti-ICE protesters have surrounded federal agents, Democratic leaders have denounced enforcement operations and tensions in Minneapolis have boiled over, but experts say none of it crosses the line into a constitutional breakdown or would justify the use of federal emergency powers by President Donald Trump.

Legal analysts say the unrest, while volatile, does not inhibit the federal government’s constitutional authority to enforce immigration law. That threshold would only be crossed if state officials themselves moved to block or materially obstruct federal agents, raising supremacy clause concerns.

Ilya Somin, a George Mason University law professor, told Fox News Digital that agitators hindering federal agents’ work, even aggressively, does not rise to that level.

“There is no general principle of law which says that anything that makes the work of federal agents more difficult in any way somehow violates the Constitution,” Somin said.

Advertisement

FEDS SHIFT TO TARGETED IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IN MINNEAPOLIS UNDER HOMAN

Protesters clash with law enforcement after a federal agent shot and killed a man Jan. 24, the second federal-involved shooting in the city during the month, deepening tensions over enforcement operations in Minneapolis. (Arthur Maiorella/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Protesters have taken to the streets of Minneapolis in recent weeks to confront immigration officers during Operation Metro Surge, a federal enforcement effort that has deployed thousands of ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents to Minnesota.

During enforcement actions, protesters have at times surrounded ICE agents with shouting, whistles, filming and unruly crowds, creating a tense mix of peaceful demonstrators and coordinated agitators that has occasionally escalated into blockades or violence.

The dynamics at play have centered on two legal principles. On one hand, the anti-commandeering doctrine prevents the federal government from forcing state and local officials to enforce federal law. On the other, obstruction of federal law enforcement is unlawful and could violate the supremacy clause, which says federal law trumps state law when the two are in conflict.

Advertisement

If the state were to pass laws that obstruct federal law enforcement from performing its job duties, that would trigger supremacy clause concerns, Somin said, but he noted that such conditions are not present in Minnesota. 

Operation Metro Surge began in December, sending 3,000 immigration agents to Minneapolis and St. Paul. The effort has led to thousands of arrests, but it has spurred resistance from residents and resulted in two high-profile deaths of U.S. citizens at the hands of immigration agents, which fueled further public outrage. The FBI is now investigating those incidents.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz met with Trump border czar Tom Homan as the administration reshuffled federal immigration leadership in the state. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Democratic state leaders, meanwhile, have widely criticized the operation and drawn blame from Republicans for exacerbating tension with their rhetoric. At one point, Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz compared ICE’s presence to the Civil War.

“I mean, is this a Fort Sumter?” Walz told The Atlantic. “It’s a physical assault. It’s an armed force that’s assaulting, that’s killing my constituents, my citizens.”

Advertisement

Asked whether the resistant nature of Minnesota’s Democratic leaders could amount to “nullification,” Somin rejected the idea.

“Nullification is when the state officials themselves resist the enforcement of federal law. If they merely fail to help the feds against private parties, that is something that’s protected by the anti-commandeering principles of the Tenth Amendment,” Somin said.

That hands-off approach has extended beyond rhetoric. Walz has welcomed a reduction in federal personnel but urged a faster drawdown, while Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has said the city would not assist with immigration enforcement.

“We were never going to agree, and we have not agreed, to enforce federal immigration law. Why? It’s not our job,” Frey said in a New York Times interview.

As state and local leaders have declined to intervene, opposition to the ICE operation has increasingly taken shape on the ground. Activists have mobilized to confront and monitor federal immigration agents, activity that legal experts distinguish from unlawful, state-led obstruction.

Advertisement

Central to that resistance is Defend the 612, a network of private citizens that has coordinated what activists describe as “ICE watching,” using encrypted messaging apps to track enforcement activity and share information about agents’ movements, according to reporting by the conservative City Journal.

In addition to street confrontations, activists have staged protests at sensitive locations, including a disruption of a church service in St. Paul, where the pastor is also an ICE field director. Several participants, including former CNN anchor Don Lemon, were arrested and charged under a federal statute typically used to protect abortion clinics and pregnancy counseling centers.

TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION VICTORY IN A MINNESOTA COURT IS A WIN FOR ALL LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS

Don Lemon has told Fox News Digital he stands by his reporting. (Don Lemon/YouTube)

Federal authorities have moved to arrest individuals accused of directly impeding immigration enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced charges against 16 agitators accused of obstructing agents and assaulting officers, while the Justice Department also charged a Minneapolis man, a self-described Antifa member, with cyberstalking after he allegedly called for attacks on ICE and doxxed a pro-ICE individual.

Advertisement

Even so, legal experts stress that, so far, all the anti-ICE activity falls short of a collapse of federal authority. Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, said existing laws already prohibit “mob” violence and obstruction, adding that Minnesota leaders’ approach has been “irresponsible” but not illegal.

The DOJ in January subpoenaed Walz, Frey and three others for information on whether they conspired to interfere with ICE’s work. A DOJ spokesman did not respond to a request for comment on the status of that probe.

Should unrest intensify, the Trump administration has floated the Insurrection Act, a rarely used provision that allows the president to respond to unlawful obstructions of federal authority. The president has said that while it remains an option, it is not currently necessary.

Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, who is leading immigration operations in Minneapolis, likewise downplayed the impact of anti-ICE agitators. 

Advertisement

“You’re not going to stop ICE. You’re not going to stop Border Patrol,” Homan said. “These roadblocks they’re putting up? It’s a joke. It’s not going to work, and it’s only going to get you arrested.”

Ilan Wurman, a University of Minnesota law professor, said in a podcast that while Trump “probably” could invoke the Insurrection Act, by constitutional standards a president should only call upon the military to enforce federal law as a “last resort.” 

Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley spelled out when the Insurrection Act could be appropriate, noting it was deferential to the president.

“The establishment of roadblocks and direct interference with the enforcement of federal laws can support such an invocation,” Turley said. “During the Civil Rights period, opposition to and obstruction of civil rights laws justified the use of military force.”

Still, Turley and others emphasize that the Minnesota protests, as intense and at times chaotic as they have been, do not yet meet the criteria for such drastic federal action.

Advertisement

“The promise of some Democratic leaders to arrest and prosecute ICE agents is likely to fail. Roadblocks to bar federal agents would also constitute obstruction and, if supported by the state, would violate the constitutional authority of the federal government,” Turley said.

Read the full article from Here

Advertisement

Illinois

Illinois Lottery Pick 3, Pick 4 results for May 3, 2026

Published

on

Illinois Lottery Pick 3, Pick 4 results for May 3, 2026


play

The Illinois Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Advertisement

Here’s a look at May 3, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Pick-3 numbers from May 3 drawing

Midday: 1-6-4, Fireball: 6

Evening: 7-4-1, Fireball: 7

Check Pick-3 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Pick-4 numbers from May 3 drawing

Midday: 7-7-7-7, Fireball: 6

Advertisement

Evening: 9-5-4-7, Fireball: 3

Check Pick-4 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning LuckyDay Lotto numbers from May 3 drawing

Midday: 01-04-07-23-26

Evening: 02-08-25-28-39

Check LuckyDay Lotto payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your prize

  • Prizes up to $600: Claim at an Illinois Lottery retailer, a Claim Center, by mail, or via an e-Claim. By mail, send the required documentation to: Illinois Lottery Claims Department, P.O. Box 19080, Springfield, IL.
  • Prizes from $601 to $10,000: Claim at a Claim Center, by mail, or via an e-Claim.
  • Prizes over $10,000: Claim at a Claim Center or by mail.
  • Appointments Required: Schedule an appointment for in-person claims.
  • Documentation: Bring a photo ID and Social Security number proof.

When are the Illinois Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 9:59 p.m. CT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 10:00 p.m. CT on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky Day Lotto (Day): 12:40 p.m. CT daily.
  • Lucky Day Lotto (Evening): 9:22 p.m. CT daily.
  • Lotto: 9:22 p.m. CT on Monday, Thursday, and Saturday.
  • Pick 3 (Day): 12:40 p.m. CT daily.
  • Pick 3 (Evening): 9:22 p.m. CT daily.
  • Pick 4 (Day): 12:40 p.m. CT daily.
  • Pick 4 (Evening): 9:22 p.m. CT daily.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by an Illinois editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading

Indiana

Zionsville nature preserve set to open soon on former golf course

Published

on

Zionsville nature preserve set to open soon on former golf course


play

A new nature preserve in Zionsville will open later this month after years of work converting an old golf course into publicly accessible greenspace.  

The Carpenter Nature Preserve is located on the site of the former Wolf Run Club. The club, which closed in 2017, sat at the northwest corner of south Michigan Road and State Road 32 where Eagle Creek runs through the town. Once the 215-acre nature preserve opens, soft and hard-paved trails will lead visitors through woods, prairies and wetlands.

Advertisement

Jarod Logsdon, superintendent of parks and recreation for the Town of Zionsville, said the town is excited to get people out to the property.

“I think it’s a great example of how people and greenspace can be side by side,” Logsdon said. “[Greenspaces] obviously enhance the quality of life for residents, but they’re people’s front door to nature.”

Handshake agreement keeps land undeveloped

The town purchased the land from residents Nancy and Jim Carpenter, who bought it from developers after it hit the market in 2017. The couple held onto the property after then-Mayor Emily Styron asked the couple to keep it free from development, Logsdon said.

Once the town had shored up the money in 2021, it purchased the property from the Carpenters. The town leveraged state and federal grants to acquire the land for $5.5 million and reserve money for the initial construction and mitigation phase.

Advertisement

Nancy Carpenter, in a 2023 news release, said Styron invited them to the property for a visit. The couple immediately recognized how appealing it would be to a developer.

“We couldn’t let that happen,” Nancy said in the release. “You cannot find anything like this in central Indiana that will ever be available again.”

The Carpenters, who cofounded Wild Birds Unlimited and have been involved with Zionsville parks for years, maintained the property prior to selling it to the town. They mowed down old golf cart trails, set up bird boxes and planted gardens to attract pollinators. The couple worked with the town to create the master plan that eventually led to the creation of the preserve.

Education and amenities at Zionsville preserve

The preserve currently is in phase one of construction and planning, Logsdon said, and when it opens it will have more than just trails.

Advertisement

The department built a pavilion with nearby restrooms as well as a nature playground with a nearby seating shelter. The playground isn’t the typical steel jungle gym, Logsdon said, but is built using wood from the Pacific Northwest.

The natural building material in the playground is meant to give visitors “a taste of nature play before they go out into the preserve,” Logsdon said.

A small amphitheater also sits on the grounds, which will host campfires and other events.

These amenities will be complete when the preserve opens to the public. The department plans to build a regional nature center in the future to provide more in-depth environmental education to visitors.

While visitors will be able to visit most of the preserve, about a third of the property will be closed to the public as the Indiana Department of Natural Resources works to rehabilitate wetlands. The state will spend about $4 million to restore and maintain Eagle Creek and its tributaries in the park.

Advertisement

Once the preserve opens, visitors can access the entrance off 900 East, just south of SR32.

Karl Schneider is an IndyStar environment reporter. You can reach him at karl.schneider@indystar.com. Follow him on Twitter @karlstartswithk or BlueSky @karlstartswithk.bsky.social.

IndyStar’s environmental reporting project is made possible through the generous support of the nonprofit Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Iowa

In many states, election-denying candidates are running to control voting

Published

on

In many states, election-denying candidates are running to control voting


Lost in the shuffle of the 2026 midterms — the unprecedented mid-decade redistricting, President Trump’s sagging favorability numbers and Democrats’ hopes of retaking the House and potentially the Senate — is an election story that could have implications for 2028 and beyond.

In 23 states, including five presidential swing states, candidates who have denied election results are running for offices that will have a direct role in certifying future elections.

That is according to a new analysis, shared exclusively with NPR ahead of its release, by States United Action, a nonprofit that seeks to protect elections and has been tracking candidate positions on the validity of election results since 2022.

“The goal is to be able to provide voters with the most accurate information possible,” said Joanna Lydgate, States United’s CEO, “and understand exactly what these candidates stand for and whether they fundamentally believe in free and fair elections in this country.”

Advertisement

In total, 39 states are holding elections this year for statewide positions that interact with elections, either for secretary of state or governor, which depending on the state has a role in administering or certifying elections, or for attorney general, which interprets and enforces election laws.

States United found at least 53 election-denying candidates are vying for those jobs at this point in the midterm cycle.

To define which candidates qualify for the title, States United tracks whether candidates meet at least one of five criteria, including whether they’ve falsely claimed Trump was the rightful winner in 2020 or if they’ve supported efforts to undermine results after audits and legal challenges were completed.

In most states, the elected position with the most direct responsibility over how elections run is secretary of state. These typically bureaucratic jobs took on new meaning in 2020, when officials from both parties faced unprecedented pressure from Trump and his allies to influence the results.

In Georgia, Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger declined Trump’s request to “find” 11,780 votes. In Michigan, Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson had armed protesters descend on her home in the weeks after voting ended.

Advertisement

Both swing states will elect new secretaries of state and governors this year, and both states currently have people in the running who have denied election results.

In Arizona, another presidential battleground, people who deny election results are running for all three critical statewide positions, according to States United’s analysis.

In 2020, Arizona’s Republican governor at the time, Doug Ducey, faced pressure from Trump to interfere in the certification process but declined to do so.

This year, however, the front-runner for the GOP nomination for governor in Arizona, Andy Biggs, voted not to certify those election results while he was serving in the U.S. House, and even made a call to a key state lawmaker at the time to investigate other ways to interfere with the process.

“We’ve watched these state officials on both sides of the aisle stand up and push back when Trump has tried to interfere with elections and election results in the past,” Lydgate said. “We know that they will do that again. But it’s incredibly important that we elect people who believe in our system and who believe in free and fair elections.”

Advertisement

Compared with recent cycles, the number of election deniers running this year in statewide races is actually down. Lydgate attributes that to state-level candidates realizing it’s a “bad campaign strategy” in places that will have competitive races come November.

“Election denial is not something that American voters like, and candidates who’ve run on that platform have paid a real price in the past,” Lydgate said.

After the 2022 midterms, an NPR analysis found that Republican secretary of state candidates who denied the results of the 2020 election generally underperformed other GOP candidates in competitive states. A separate analysis of the same election by States United estimated the penalty for election denial to be roughly 3 percentage points.

Candidates running in states Trump won by double digits, or in crowded primaries where they are seeking Trump’s endorsement, clearly aren’t being dissuaded by that data however.

Brendan Fischer, who leads research into efforts to undermine elections at the Campaign Legal Center, says a powerful “election denial infrastructure” has cropped up since 2020, which has proven effective at moving candidates and lawmakers toward false theories about voting and policy responses to that misinformation.

Advertisement

“The election denier movement still represents a tiny, tiny minority of the country,” Fischer said. “But it is an energized and active force within Republican politics. It’s an organized interest group that [Republican candidates and lawmakers] need to be at least somewhat responsive to.”

Copyright 2026 NPR





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending