The following is an excerpt of the judge’s discourse and entire transcript from several lawsuits brought against ICE and DHS for arresting/detaining citizens in Minneapolis without cause, sending them to detention centers out of state, releasing some without proper clothing away from their homes in sub-zero weather, and other violations of court orders which demanded their immediate release.

Excerpt from judge’s discourse (read entire transcript of the proceeding below):

“The Government makes the point that some of the attorneys currently are under extraordinary strain, and you are obviously telling that to this Court understanding that the operation that explains this process is not an operation that is driven by the Federal Courts. I do accept that Operation Metro Surge has generated a volume of arrests and detentions that has taxed existing systems, staffing, and coordination between DOJ and the DHS. I read that in your papers. I understand that.

“I also don’t have any reason to take issue at this time that individual attorneys, including those appearing here, are working in good faith and under difficult circumstances. But those facts, even taken as true, do not answer the legal problem that it presents for this Court. If the Government undertakes an enforcement operation of this scale, one that results in the detention of large numbers of people, including individuals who are lawfully present in the United States, then the Government assumes a corresponding obligation to ensure that each detention complies with the Constitution and with court orders governing release. Volume, that is, the volume of cases and matters, is not a justification for diluting constitutional rights and it never can be. It heightens the need for care. Having what you feel are too many detainees, too many cases, too many deadlines, and not enough infrastructure to keep up with it all, is not a defense to continued detention. If anything, it ought to be a warning sign.

“But what you cannot do is to detain first and then sort out lawful authority later. Continued detention is not lawful just because compliance with release orders is administratively difficult or because an operation has expanded beyond the Government’s capacity to execute it lawfully.”

Below is the transcript of the case: