Federal Judge Considers Contempt Charges in Immigration Property Dispute

A federal judge in Minnesota held a contentious hearing on Tuesday to determine whether U.S. Attorney Daniel N. Rosen and ICE officials should be held in contempt for failing to return personal property to immigrant detainees who were ordered released. The case highlights ongoing tensions between judges and the Department of Justice over immigration enforcement policies.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan called the hearing after identifying numerous violations of court orders requiring the return of property, including cash, phones, passports, and identity documents to 28 immigrants who had been detained and then released. The hearing quickly became tense, with Bryan and Rosen engaging in a war of words over the government's compliance with judicial orders.

Bryan expressed concern that Rosen might bow out of the hearing altogether, even floating the possibility of imprisonment to compel his participation. "I haven’t ruled out the consequence of imprisonment," Bryan said, though he acknowledged it was unlikely. He described such a decision as "a historic low point for the office of the United States Attorney and for this District."

Rosen argued that any losses were due to human error and not intentional disobedience. "We take very seriously the fact that it’s lost," Rosen told Bryan, adding that officials made good faith attempts to locate the property. He also stated that there was no contempt of court, claiming there had been "no defiance, no disobedience."

As the hearing continued, it became clear that in three cases, unreturned property was being returned to its owners, while in two instances, the government had outright lost belongings. These included a woman’s driver’s license and a man’s car keys, cell phone, and earphones.

The hearing is part of a broader pattern of judicial frustration with the government's compliance in immigration cases. Across Minnesota and other states, judges have expressed impatience with repeated violations of court orders in immigration cases. In New Jersey, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz found more than 50 instances of violations of court orders across hundreds of immigration cases since early December.

In West Virginia, a federal judge criticized the government for continuing to detain non-citizens without criminal records despite judicial rulings against such practices. The judge warned that continued detention would result in legal consequences, including potential contempt proceedings.

The tensions between judges and the Department of Justice have been exacerbated by Operation Metro Surge, a crackdown on immigration initiated during President Donald Trump's administration. This operation has led to an influx of cases challenging detentions, straining the government’s legal resources and leading to repeated violations of court orders.

Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz of Minnesota’s trial-level court has been particularly outspoken about the government’s approach, stating that his patience with ICE had run dry. He warned that the court would continue to take whatever measures necessary to protect the rule of law, including moving toward criminal contempt if necessary.

Bryan did not make a decision from the bench and said he may want to receive additional legal arguments before ruling on whether Rosen or other officials should be held in contempt. The case underscores the ongoing challenges faced by judges and immigration authorities as they navigate complex legal and enforcement issues.