Midwest
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
“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.
“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
Midwest
Walz slams Trump admin for temporarily halting Medicaid funding to Minnesota: ‘Campaign of retribution’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz accused the Trump administration of unleashing a “campaign of retribution” against his state after Vice President JD Vance announced a temporary pause in Medicaid funding there.
Vance’s announcement was made after President Donald Trump railed against fraud in Minnesota on Tuesday evening in his State of the Union address.
Vance said Wednesday that he is giving Walz 60 days to clean up how the state doles out funding, adding, “We are stopping the federal payments that will go to the state government until the state government takes its obligations seriously to stop the fraud that’s being perpetrated against the American taxpayer.”
“This is a campaign of retribution. Trump is weaponizing the entirety of the federal government to punish blue states like Minnesota,” Walz, a Democrat, wrote in response on X. “These cuts will be devastating for veterans, families with young kids, folks with disabilities, and working people across our state.”
Vice President JD Vance, left, Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Dr. Mehmet Oz, center, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. (Tom Brenner/AP; Steve Karnowski/AP)
“This has nothing to do with fraud. The agents Trump allegedly sent to investigate fraud are shooting protesters and arresting children,” Walz added. “His DOJ is gutting the U.S. Attorney’s Office and crippling their ability to prosecute fraud. And every week Trump pardons another fraudster.”
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.
The administration and Congress have zeroed in on rampant abuse of federal taxpayers’ funds since December 2025, when details of Minnesota’s fraud relating to social and welfare programs stretching back to the COVID-19 pandemic first came into the national spotlight. Investigators have since estimated the Minnesota scheme could top $9 billion.
HEAVILY REDACTED AUDIT FINDS MINNESOTA MEDICAID HAD WIDESPREAD VULNERABILITIES
Gov. Tim Walz has 60 days to respond to a letter from Mehmet Oz, administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (Jim Vondruska/Getty Images)
Mehmet Oz, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said Wednesday that the pause marks “the largest action against fraud that we’ve ever taken” at the federal agency, before launching into how the administration is deferring funds to the state.
“It’s going to be $259 million of deferred payments for Medicaid to Minnesota, which we’re announcing, as I speak, to Gov. Walz and his team,” Oz said. “That’s based on an audit of the last three months of 2025. Restated, a quarter billion dollars is not going to be paid this month to Minnesota for its Medicaid claims.”
Dr. Mehmet Oz speaks beside Vice President JD Vance during a news conference on efforts to combat fraud, in the Old Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus on Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2026. (Tom Brenner/AP)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We have notified the state and said that we will give them the money, but we’re going to hold it and only release it after they propose and act on a comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem,” Oz also said. “If Minnesota fails to clean up the systems, the state will rack up $1 billion of deferred payments this year.”
Read the full article from Here
Detroit, MI
Terrion Arnold ‘maintains complete innocence’ in kidnapping, theft case
I represent Mr. Terrion Arnold in connection with an incident that allegedly occurred on February 4, 2026, in Tampa, Florida, which resulted in the arrest of five individuals on serious felony charges.
To be clear, Mr. Arnold had no involvement whatsoever in the activities that led to those arrests. He did not participate in, nor was he present for, any conduct related to the alleged offenses. There is no evidence in police reports, text messages, or witness statements that implicates Mr. Arnold in any way.
In fact, after direct communication with the lead prosecutor, it has been confirmed that no charges have been filed against Mr. Arnold in connection with this matter.
Recent media coverage has referenced an Order issued by Circuit Judge J. Logan Murphy, which improperly suggests Mr. Arnold’s involvement in the incident. That same Order also incorrectly identifies Ms. Devalle as Mr. Arnold’s girlfriend. Both assertions are false, misleading, and entirely unsupported by the record.
Mr. Arnold categorically denies these unfounded claims and maintains his complete innocence. He was not involved in the crimes allegedly committed on February 4, 2026, in Tampa, Florida.
We strongly urge members of the media to refrain from perpetuating inaccurate or speculative narratives. The facts are clear, and they do not support any claim of wrongdoing by Mr. Arnold.
Milwaukee, WI
Sheriff’s Office backpedals on controversial facial recognition deal
Drone view shows Milwaukee’s County Courthouse
Built in 1931, Milwaukee’s historic County Courthouse is in dire need of repair and upgrades. Here’s a recent drone view of the MacArthur Square building.
The Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office will not move forward on a potential deal to use facial recognition technology, Sheriff Denita Ball announced Friday.
In a statement on Feb. 27, Ball said after “thoughtful evaluation” and “meaningful dialogue” with community stakeholders and leaders, she decided to stop pursuing a contract with Biometrica, a Las Vegas-based company whose technology allows authorities to compare photos to a large database of photos for matches.
“While we recognize the potential of this software as an investigative tool, we also recognize that trust between the MCSO and the people we serve is important,” she said.
“My discussions with local advocates highlighted valid concerns regarding how such data could be accessed or perceived in the current national climate. This decision is not a retreat from innovation but rather an understanding that timing matters, too,” Ball said.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on Feb. 17 that the Sheriff’s Office was on the verge of signing off on the use of facial recognition technology after news broke at a community advisory board meeting held by the office.
The update on the office’s sign-off on an intent to enter into a contract with Biometrica blindsided local officials and advocates because it contradicted earlier claims that the office had not moved forward with a controversial contract.
At the time, supervisors on the county’s judiciary and legislation committee called for more information from the Sheriff’s Office about the nature of the then-potential contract.
Supervisor Justin Bielinski, who chairs the committee, said Ball’s decision to step away from the deal was good news, but said he was still feeling wary.
“I would like to see more I guess,” he said of the two paragraph statement from Ball. “At what point would she reconsider, right?”
County Executive David Crowley, who is running for governor as a Democrat, had also voiced concerns about a possible contract when news came to light earlier this month.
After learning of Ball’s decision to not move forward with Biometrica, Crowley thanked community members who voiced concerns about facial recognition technology, saying he will “continue doing everything in my authority to ensure our residents’ First Amendment rights, civil liberties, and personal data are protected.”
In recent months, Milwaukee politicians and residents rebuffed local law enforcement’s efforts to pursue the use of such technology at both the city and county levels, with many citing concerns over racial bias and unjust surveillance of residents.
The Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors voted last summer to recommend the development of a policy framework for the use of facial recognition technology as worries about its use by local law enforcement grew in the community.
The policy emphasized that the use of such technology doesn’t “suppress First Amendment-related activities, violate privacy, or otherwise adversely impact individuals’ civil rights and liberties,” and called for a pause on acquiring new facial recognition technology until regulatory policies were in place to monitor any existing and new surveillance technology.
In early February, the Milwaukee Police Department paused its pursuit of facial recognition technology after almost a year of pushback from activists and some public officials at public meetings. The department also noted that community feedback was a part of its final decision as well as a volatile political climate amid the federal government’s immigration crackdown.
(This story was updated to add new information.)
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology7 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology7 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making