Trump Administration Hits a Legal Wall in Minneapolis: Conservative Judge Issues “Contempt of Court” Ultimatum to the Government

MINNEAPOLIS — Following the death of a second person as a result of federal agents’ actions, the Trump administration was forced to bow to growing public pressure over its hardline immigration raids in Minneapolis. The White House made changes to on-the-ground operational leadership, replacing Greg Bovino with Tom Homan, and signaled that it would adopt a more conciliatory tone toward local Democratic officials.

However, developments late Monday night showed that the administration’s strategy of “bending the rules” in pursuit of rapid results will continue to create serious problems. This time, the warning did not come from political opponents, but from a senior federal judge appointed by Republicans.

“The Court’s Patience Has Run Out”

Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for Minnesota has shown increasing frustration with the administration’s actions. In an extraordinary move, Schiltz ordered Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons to appear in court for a critical hearing scheduled for Friday. The judge went further, explicitly warning Lyons that he could face contempt of court charges.

This step means that a senior federal official could face formal sanctions for his agency’s failure to comply with court orders. At a minimum, Lyons will be required to account for more than 2,000 cases in which judges have ruled that ICE unlawfully detained individuals. According to reporting by Politico’s Kyle Cheney, the scale of these illegal detentions exposes the extent of the agency’s disregard for the law.

With his recent rulings, Judge Schiltz has demonstrated a willingness to scrutinize the administration with a level of firmness that few judges dare to employ.

A Profile That Undermines the Claims: Who Is Judge Schiltz?

Under normal circumstances, a judge’s personal political views or the president who appointed them should not influence legal decisions. In this case, however, Schiltz’s background is especially significant. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Schiltz also served as a law clerk to the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a towering figure of conservative jurisprudence.

That Schiltz has become the latest Republican-appointed judge to openly challenge the administration undermines the White House’s attempts to portray judicial pushback as a “left-wing judicial revolt.” A jurist with impeccable conservative credentials rebelling against the administration strongly suggests that the issue is not political, but fundamentally legal.

Defiance and Legal Chaos

In his court order, Judge Schiltz cited dozens of court rulings that the defendant government has failed to comply with in recent weeks. The specific incident that prompted Lyons’ court summons involved Schiltz’s order requiring ICE to either hold a bond hearing for a detained immigrant by January 21 or release the individual. As of January 23, ICE had done neither.

Acknowledging that his move was extraordinary, Schiltz explained his reasoning in stark terms:

“The extent of ICE’s violations of court orders is equally extraordinary. Lesser measures have been tried and have failed. The Court’s patience has run out.”

Schiltz also accused the administration of deploying thousands of ICE agents to Minneapolis without making any preparations to handle the hundreds of habeas corpus petitions and lawsuits that such operations would inevitably generate. According to the judge, the administration focused solely on making arrests while disregarding the legal infrastructure required to support them.

Rejection of the “Trust Us, We’re the Government” Approach

This forceful court order followed two similarly sharp letters Schiltz issued the previous week. Those letters concerned the arrests of protesters at a church in St. Paul who alleged that the church’s pastor was, in fact, a senior local ICE official.

In that incident, the Department of Justice sought charges against eight individuals, including former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who said he was engaged in journalistic activity. A magistrate judge, however, ruled that there was no probable cause for five of them, including Lemon. The DOJ then bypassed standard procedures and asked the District Court—Schiltz’s court—to intervene.

Schiltz stated that he consulted multiple colleagues and that none could recall any precedent for such a request. When the judge did not act quickly enough, the DOJ appealed to a higher court, which also rejected the request.

In his letters, Schiltz criticized ICE’s defiance of court orders and the unlawful detention of multiple individuals, including a two-year-old child. He dismissed the government’s defense strategy with biting clarity:

“The government argued that because it said something, and because it is ‘the government,’ I should simply accept it as true.”

The judge further emphasized that the government had failed to secure grand jury indictments in politically charged cases with weak evidence, and therefore attempted to manipulate the legal process by labeling the situation a “national security emergency.”