Trump Administration Wins Court Fight as Judge Clears ICE Operations Near Schools 

The Trump administration scored a legal victory in combating illegal immigration when a federal judge cleared the way for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to operate near schools, for now. 

The lawsuit brought by Minnesota public school districts sought a temporary injunction against immigration enforcement agents having a presence near schools, claiming it increased absenteeism and disrupted learning. 

U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino of the District of Minnesota denied the schools’ request for a preliminary injunction while the case moves forward and said the plaintiffs likely lacked standing. Provinzino is a Biden appointee. 

“Accordingly, because the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have not shown they are likely to establish standing, the Court also must conclude that Plaintiffs are unlikely to prevail on the merits,” the judge wrote in a 38-page opinion released Wednesday. 

The plaintiffs include the Fridley and Duluth public school districts, as well as the Education Minnesota union. They are represented by Democracy Forward, a liberal litigation group chaired by veteran Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias. 

In January 2025, the Department of Homeland Security rescinded restrictions on immigration enforcement actions in or near “sensitive locations,” such as schools and school bus stops. The guidance directed agents to use discretion in these situations.

The Trump administration’s Operation Metro Surge increased the number of federal agents in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. According to plaintiffs, the operation included immigration enforcement actions on or near school grounds; the school districts sued in February. 

But the judge was skeptical that agents’ proximity to schools was the cause of decreased student attendance. 

“It is not clear, however, that this decreased attendance and the potential loss of enrollment-based funding is traceable to the 2025 Guidance rather than the more generalized fears of the school districts’ students and their families about broader immigration enforcement policy changes and activity, specifically during Operation Metro Surge,” she wrote. 

Further, she ruled the department had latitude to change such policies. 

“The 2025 Guidance, in short, did not change DHS’s ability or authority to engage in enforcement activity at or near protected areas,” the judge wrote. “What has changed, evidently, is DHS’s willingness—not its authority—to conduct immigration enforcement activity at or near protected areas like schools. But such immigration enforcement has always been subject to DHS’s judgment and discretion, even under the 2021 guidance.” 

The plaintiffs, in a joint statement, asserted that before the 2025 update to DHS policy, “schools have been recognized as places where students can learn and grow without fear.” 

“The Trump-Vance administration’s decision to allow immigration enforcement at and around schools has disrupted classrooms, driven families away, and created an environment of fear that no child should have to endure,” the plaintiffs’ joint statement says. “While the court declined to immediately stop that activity, this is not the end of our fight.”  

“We brought this case because every student deserves access to education in a safe and stable environment, and we will continue fighting to restore those protections and ensure that schools remain places of learning, not fear.”