Hussen v. Mullin
Overview
Overview
Minnesota residents who have been targeted by federal immigration enforcement agents sued the Department of Homeland Security, ICE, and Border Patrol over the increase in deployment of federal immigration enforcement agents from numerous agencies to the State of Minnesota, "Operation Metro Surge."
The Issue
Issue
Whether federal immigration enforcement agencies violated the constitutional or statutory rights of Minnesota residents through Operation Metro Surge, a targeted deployment of federal immigration enforcement personnel to the state.
The Rules
Rule
Federal immigration enforcement must comply with Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, Fifth Amendment due process guarantees, and statutory limits on agency authority. Courts review enforcement actions for constitutional compliance and proper statutory authorization.
The Application
Analysis
The plaintiffs challenge whether Operation Metro Surge's deployment and resulting enforcement actions were authorized by law and conducted in compliance with constitutional protections. The defendants must demonstrate that the enforcement operations fell within agency authority and did not violate plaintiffs' constitutional rights.
The Conclusion
Hussen v. Mullin ended on June 18, 2026, when the District of Minnesota terminated the case after all plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal on June 11, 2026. The Minnesota residents who brought the suit against the Department of Homeland Security, ICE, and Border Patrol over federal immigration-enforcement actions dismissed their own claims before the court reached the merits, so the case produced no ruling on the underlying constitutional questions. Judge Eric C. Tostrud presided. A defense-counsel withdrawal notice was docketed on August 3, 2026, an administrative filing that did not reopen the matter.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support