Important News

DHS says Operation Metro Surge arrested several alleged criminal noncitizens in Minnesota and urges local officials to honor ICE detainers

Interesting: 0/0 • Support: 0/0Log in to vote

Key takeaways

  • DHS reported arrests during Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota of individuals it described as "the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens."
  • The release names six people (Jai Vang, Meng Khong Yang, Joshua Fornoh, Rene Mercedes Hernandez, Chia Yang, Irving Cadena Gonzalez) and lists the criminal convictions DHS attributes to each.
  • DHS said Governor Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey have refused to cooperate with ICE and alleged that nearly 470 criminal noncitizens have been released from Minnesota custody since President Trump took office.
  • The statement says DHS called on state and local officials to honor ICE arrest detainers for more than 1,360 people in the state�A0�A0custody.
  • Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin is quoted criticizing local non-cooperation and saying arrests included rapists, armed robbers, and drug traffickers.
  • The individuals named in the release are identified as coming from Laos, Liberia, El Salvador, and Mexico.

Follow Up Questions

What exactly is "Operation Metro Surge" and which DHS or ICE units are running it?Expand

“Operation Metro Surge” is the name DHS and ICE give to a large, time‑limited immigration enforcement “surge” in Minnesota that began around Dec. 1, 2025. It deploys roughly 2,000 federal immigration agents to the Twin Cities area for at least 30 days to arrest and remove non‑citizens whom DHS says are removable, with a stated focus on people it labels the “worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens” (non‑citizens with criminal records or prior removal orders). The operation is led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and carried out mainly by its interior‑enforcement arm (Enforcement and Removal Operations), with additional agents from Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) brought in under DHS authority.

What is an ICE arrest detainer and how does it affect local jails and custody decisions?Expand

An ICE arrest detainer is a written request, not a court order, that ICE sends to a jail, prison, or other law‑enforcement agency asking them to: (1) tell ICE before they release a person ICE believes is a removable non‑citizen, and (2) hold that person for up to 48 hours beyond the time they would normally be released so ICE can take custody for immigration purposes. Legally, detainers are voluntary; agencies are not required to honor them, and ICE says they are meant not to affect decisions about bail or sentence length. In Minnesota specifically, the attorney general has formally concluded that state and local agencies may not lawfully keep someone in custody past their release time based solely on an ICE detainer, and doing so risks civil liability, so jails generally release people when their state charges are resolved even if ICE has lodged a detainer.

What does DHS mean by the term "criminal illegal alien"—is that a legal classification tied to immigration status, criminal conviction, or both?Expand

“Criminal illegal alien” is not a defined legal category in U.S. immigration law; it is a political and enforcement label DHS/ICE are using. Legally, the Immigration and Nationality Act defines terms like “alien,” “removable alien,” and certain “criminal offenses,” but not “criminal alien” or “criminal illegal alien.” In practice, ICE uses this phrase to describe non‑U.S. citizens whom it believes are in the country without lawful status (or otherwise removable) and who also have criminal convictions or serious criminal charges. For example, ICE’s Criminal Alien Program targets “undocumented aliens with criminal records,” and DHS press releases about Operation Metro Surge repeatedly describe named individuals as “criminal illegal aliens” from specific countries and list their criminal convictions.

After a DHS/ICE arrest like these, what are the typical next steps for the arrested individuals (prosecution, detention, deportation, or transfer to local authorities)?Expand

After an ICE/DHS arrest in operations like Metro Surge, the usual sequence is:

  1. Screening immigration status and history. ICE checks whether the person already has a prior removal (deportation) order or is otherwise removable under immigration law.
  2. If there is a final removal order or reinstatable order: ICE can move directly to enforcement of that order—typically detaining the person in immigration custody and arranging removal, often via transfer to out‑of‑state detention centers and charter flights operated for deportations.
  3. If there is no final order: ICE generally serves a Notice to Appear (NTA) starting removal (deportation) proceedings in immigration court. The person may be:
    • held in immigration detention; or
    • released on bond, parole, or an alternatives‑to‑detention program while the case proceeds.
  4. If ICE believes a separate federal crime occurred (for example, illegal re‑entry after deportation, human smuggling, fraud, or serious drug offenses), it may refer the case to U.S. Attorneys for criminal prosecution. In those cases, the person is typically transferred to the U.S. Marshals/prison system, and after any criminal sentence is served they return to ICE custody for removal proceedings.
  5. Transfers with local authorities usually run the other direction: from state/local jails to ICE when someone finishes their state sentence and a detainer is honored. In Minnesota, however, state law and the attorney general’s opinion bar holding people past their state release time solely on an ICE detainer, so transfers typically require either a criminal warrant or ICE arresting the person directly in the community.
What is the source or basis for the figures cited ("nearly 470" released and "more than 1,360" in custody)?Expand

The figures in the DHS press release—“nearly 470” criminal noncitizens released and “more than 1,360” criminal noncitizens in Minnesota custody with ICE detainers—come from DHS itself and are not independently documented in the press release. The Jan. 13, 2026 DHS statement simply asserts that “since President Trump took office, Governor Walz has refused to cooperate with ICE and released nearly 470 criminal illegal aliens back onto the streets of Minnesota” and that there are “more than 1,360” people in state custody with ICE arrest detainers, but it does not provide underlying data, case lists, or a public methodology. No external datasets or audits currently available publicly can verify or break down those precise DHS counts.

How do Minnesota's local policies described as "sanctuary" affect cooperation between state/local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities?Expand

Minnesota officials generally reject the “sanctuary” label, but state and local policies do limit some cooperation with federal civil immigration enforcement:

  • Statewide limits on detainers: The Minnesota attorney general’s 2025 formal opinion says state and local law‑enforcement agencies have no legal authority to hold or arrest someone based solely on an ICE immigration detainer once they would otherwise be released, because detainers are only civil requests, not warrants. Holding people longer would be an unconstitutional arrest and exposes agencies to false‑imprisonment liability. As a result, jails must release people when their state charges are resolved, even if ICE has issued a detainer.
  • Local policies restricting ICE use of city resources: Minneapolis and Saint Paul have adopted “immigrant‑friendly” policies like limiting when city staff share information with ICE and, in Minneapolis, prohibiting immigration enforcement operations in city‑owned parking lots and similar spaces. These policies are designed to keep local police focused on local public‑safety duties and avoid entangling city services in civil immigration enforcement.
  • Federal characterization as ‘sanctuary’: DHS and the Trump administration have labeled Minnesota, Minneapolis, and St. Paul as “sanctuary” jurisdictions because they do not honor ICE detainers or provide broad assistance with civil immigration enforcement. Minnesota sheriffs’ departments can still cooperate with ICE in some ways (for example, through 287(g) agreements), but the detainer and resource‑use limits significantly constrain routine cooperation.

In practice, these policies mean ICE often must arrest people in public or at homes and workplaces rather than receiving them directly from Minnesota jails, and state/local agencies do not extend custody solely to facilitate civil immigration arrests.

Comments

Only logged-in users can comment.
Loading…