A federal judge in Minnesota on Wednesday issued a temporary order preventing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from detaining or arresting refugees while their cases are under review.
The judge cited the individuals’ lawful entry into the United States and compliance with asylum procedures, immediately affecting hundreds of refugees and curbing federal efforts to reexamine their cases.
U.S. District Judge John Tunheim mandated the immediate release of refugees who had already been detained and barred future arrests related to the review.
He emphasized that the individuals had undergone extensive background checks, received approvals from multiple federal agencies, and were authorized to work.
“None have been deemed a danger to the community or a flight risk,” Tunheim wrote.
Earlier this month, DHS announced a review of 5,600 refugee cases in Minnesota who had not yet received permanent residency.
The initiative, part of a broader effort to examine potential fraud in immigrant communities, raised questions because some refugees had already surpassed the one-year mark required for additional vetting under federal law.
The affected refugees filed a class-action lawsuit against the department, arguing that its “Operation Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening” program violated federal statutes and agency precedent.
Tunheim agreed, ruling that detaining lawfully admitted refugees without formal grounds for removal was unlawful, Bloomberg Law reported.
In his decision, Tunheim stressed the refugees’ legal rights, including the right to live and work in the U.S. without fear of arbitrary arrest.
He prohibited Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from further detentions while the lawsuit continues, reinforcing protections for individuals who had already been legally resettled.
The recent enforcement actions caused widespread alarm among Minnesota’s refugee community.
Individuals were reportedly detained locally and transported to facilities in Texas with little notice, leaving families scrambling for support and legal representation.
Some detainees were released far from home, forcing them to find their way back to Minnesota on their own, according to The Guardian.
Plaintiffs recounted traumatic experiences, including arrests at home, extended transfers, and limited communication with legal counsel or family members.
One refugee described the ordeal, stating, “I fled my home country to escape government persecution. I can’t believe it’s happening again here.”
Judge Tunheim determined that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims.
He highlighted the immediate and irreparable harm caused by the detentions and noted that while the government has a strong interest in enforcing immigration laws, there is no public interest in perpetuating unlawful actions.
Advocacy organizations and legal representatives welcomed the ruling.
Berger Montague PC and The Advocates for Human Rights praised the court’s decision, with Michele Garnett McKenzie, executive director of the advocacy group, calling the detentions “an unprecedented assault on core human rights.”
The temporary restraining order applies to all refugees in Minnesota who have not yet obtained permanent resident status and who have not been charged with grounds for removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
DHS has not issued a public response to the ruling, which remains in effect as the case, U.H.A. v. Bondi, D. Minn., No. 0:26-cv-00417, continues through the courts.
