Revealed Emails Show Lawyers in Sanctuary City Coordinating Efforts to Assist Illegal Immigrants Amid ICE Presence

EXCLUSIVE – Leaked communications among certain Minneapolis-area attorneys reveal efforts to actively hinder the actions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, regarding illegal immigrant defendants in the sanctuary city.

On February 6, a private email listserv reached hundreds of members from the Minnesota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, referred to as MACDL. A source familiar with the situation shared insights with Fox News Digital but requested anonymity to protect their identity.

State Law Provides a Legal Shield

On the same day the emails circulated, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison issued a crucial opinion outlining that state law prohibits local and state law enforcement from detaining individuals based solely on an immigration detainer when they are otherwise eligible for release. A subsequent press release highlighted this important legal interpretation.

One email took on a concerning tone, with a subject line mentioning ICE’s presence, which likely refers to the Public Safety Facility. The message expressed alertness to reports of undercover ICE officers in the Hennepin County Public Safety Facility. The directive emphasized the need to take proactive measures to safeguard clients in these challenging circumstances.

Lawyers Encourage Remote Hearings to Evade ICE

Responses flooded in from other lawyers, many recommending that attorneys apply for remote Zoom hearings for their illegal immigrant clients. This strategy aims to reduce the likelihood of defendants encountering ICE officers by eliminating the need for in-person court appearances.

Since the beginning of the Trump administration in January 2017, numerous sanctuary city officials have taken steps to counteract federal initiatives targeting illegal immigration. President Trump acted swiftly, signing multiple executive orders designed to bolster ICE and other law enforcement agencies in their detention and removal processes.

A recent directive from the Department of Homeland Security rescinded earlier guidelines established by the Biden administration, which had restricted ICE and Customs and Border Protection officers from conducting enforcement activities in sensitive locations.

Changes Under the Trump Administration

In a January statement, a DHS spokesperson emphasized that the recent enforcement changes would empower agents within Customs and Border Protection and ICE to uphold immigration laws and apprehend individuals with criminal backgrounds, including serious offenses such as murder and sexual assault.

Trump’s administration firmly stated that it would not restrict law enforcement’s ability to perform its duties, asserting confidence in their discretion to make sound judgments in the field.

The spokesperson criticized the Biden administration for allegedly abusing the humanitarian parole program, allowing 1.5 million migrants to enter the United States without thorough vetting. They assured that upon taking office, the Trump administration would return to a case-by-case assessment of migrants.

Urgent Strategies from Local Attorneys

In the Minnesota email exchanges, attorney Ronnie Santana from the Tamburino Law Group proposed a collective discussion among lawyers about the potential for converting hearings to virtual formats. This conversion aims to shield clients perceived as likely targets for ICE enforcement.

JaneAnne Murray, another participant, reported successfully obtaining authorization for a Zoom appearance for her client after explaining the specific immigration concerns involved.

The proactive stance of certain judges in the Third Judicial District was noted by Barry Cattadoris from the Third Judicial District Public Defender’s Office. He mentioned that select judges actively encourage Zoom requests in cases involving immigration issues, considering the recent presence of ICE in courthouses.

Legal Professionals Share Concerns

Cattadoris also commented on the implications of recent detentions, asserting that individuals in the Third Judicial District detained since January 20 had either no legal status or serious charges. However, he expressed concern over the detainment of individuals without convictions, further complicating the landscape.

In an effort to escape ICE-related complications, one attorney advised seeking alternative reasons for requesting remote hearings that do not directly mention immigration. Suggestions included framing requests around interpreter needs, highlighting that remote formats could enhance the effectiveness of communication.

ACLU’s Involvement in Local Issues

ACLU-MN attorney Alicia Granse expressed a commitment to advocate for individuals affected by ICE actions in courthouses and jails. Granse indicated that it is unacceptable to detain someone solely based on an ICE detainer, emphasizing the need for valid judicial warrants supported by probable cause.

The Legal Landscape for Attorneys

Local officials are not obliged to cooperate with ICE or hold undocumented immigrants based on detainers. A January memo from ICE details that enforcement actions conducted near courthouses target specific individuals, including gang members and those publicly acknowledged to be security risks.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley commented on the emails, drawing attention to concerns regarding the conversion of hearings to virtual formats purely to circumvent ICE engagement. He highlighted the potential legal ramifications of such actions for court systems and the elected officials overseeing them.

As of now, no member of the MACDL involved in these communications has faced criminal charges for allegedly undermining law enforcement efforts, and there has been no legal action specifically stemming from these email exchanges.

Navigating Complex Immigration Laws

Federal regulations outline serious legal implications for individuals involved in harboring undocumented immigrants. Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) classifies concealing or shielding an illegal immigrant from detection as an offense. Furthermore, the laws make it a crime to conspire to aid in such behavior.

In 2019, then-Massachusetts Judge Shelley Joseph faced legal scrutiny for allegedly obstructing federal agents attempting to arrest an illegal immigrant defendant in her courtroom. Though the case against her was dropped in 2022, the Massachusetts Judicial Conduct Commission initiated an ethics inquiry into her actions.

MACDL’s Response to Media Inquiries

In light of media inquiries, the MACDL issued a statement expressing that the authors of the emails did not consent to their correspondence being shared publicly. They conveyed feelings of anger and betrayal regarding the ongoing discussions surrounding their communications.

In recent months, Trump has pursued aggressive immigration policies that include declaring a national emergency at the border and implementing comprehensive removal procedures for undocumented individuals.

As of January 31, ICE reported the arrest of over 7,000 undocumented immigrants and instituted nearly 6,000 detainers for individuals suspected of being unlawfully present in the United States.