A federal judge blocked six [1] Justice Department subpoenas directed at Minnesota officials on June 22, 2026 [2].
The ruling limits the federal government's ability to compel state and local leaders to assist in immigration enforcement, signaling a judicial check on Justice Department tactics against "sanctuary" jurisdictions.
U.S. District Judge John Tunheim ruled that the subpoenas were unlawful. He said the actions constituted harassment and retaliation because the officials had refused to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with immigration enforcement [3, 4]. The subpoenas targeted several leaders, including Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey [5, 6].
Tunheim said the legal moves were an "impermissible attempt to coerce state officials into enforcing federal immigration law" [7]. The judge's decision comes amid a broader conflict between federal immigration probes and state-level policies that prioritize the protection of undocumented residents.
Governor Walz said that Minnesota will continue to protect all residents, regardless of immigration status [8].
The Justice Department did not contest the characterization of the subpoenas as part of an immigration probe. A DOJ spokesperson said the department will consider its next steps in light of the court's decision [9].
The court's decision prevents the federal government from using these specific legal instruments to force cooperation from the governor's office, or the mayor's office in Minneapolis [5, 6].
“"These subpoenas are an impermissible attempt to coerce state officials into enforcing federal immigration law."”
This ruling reinforces the legal boundary between state and federal authority regarding immigration enforcement. By labeling the subpoenas as 'harassment,' the court has set a precedent that may protect other state officials from similar federal pressure tactics when they refuse to allocate local resources to ICE operations.
