govinfo:USCOURTS-mnd-0_26-cv-00778-3

Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

S.M.,

Petitioner,

Respondents.

Civil No. 26-639 (JRT/DTS)

CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 1 of 7
2

CHRISTIAN A.S.C.,

Petitioner,

TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General
of the United States; MARKWAYNE
MULLIN, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security; TODD M. LYONS,
Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; DAVID
EASTERWOOD, Acting Director, St. Paul
Field Office, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; MARY DE ANDA-
YBARRA, Director, El Paso Field Office,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
and WARDEN, Director of the El Paso
Camp East Montana,

Respondents.

Civil No. 26-778 (JRT/LIB)

RIKY A.M.L.,

P e t i t i o n e r ,

TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General
of the United States; MARKWAYNE
MULLIN, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security; and TODD M. LYONS,
Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement,

Respondents.

Civil No. 26-1429 (JRT/JFD)

CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 2 of 7
3

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASES
Beginning in late 2025 and continuing in to the early months of 2026, the federal
government deployed more than 3,000 federa l immigration agents across the state of
Minnesota. As part of this “Operation Me tro Surge,” thousands of Minnesota residents
were arrested and detained—and many were rapidly transferred out of the state to
detention facilities across the country.1 Thousands of individuals sought habeas relief in
federal court stemming from these arrests. 2 In the above-captioned cases, Petitioners
filed habeas petitions challenging the la wfulness of their arrest and detention. 3 In each
case, after the Court ordered Petitioners’ release from custody, Respondents failed to
return personal property that had been confiscated from Petitioners upon their
arrest—including identification documents, phones, and other items.
On March 5, 2026, the Cour t held a consolidated he aring for the three above-
captioned cases and two others (Civ. No. 26-424, J.B.C.O. v. Bondi and Civ. No. 26-832,

1 See generally Jeff Day and Ryan Faircloth, Reckoning, Retribution and Resistance , Minnesota
Star Tribune, Apr. 5, 2026, at A1, available at https://www.startribune.com/reckoning-
retribution-and-resistance-the-behind-the-scenes-story-of-operation-metro-surge/601583420
(last accessed on June 5, 2026) [https://perma.cc/5ETT-KW8X].

2 See generally Max Nesternak, Lawyers filed over 1,000 lawsuits challenging immigrant
detentions during Operation Metro Surge , Minnesota Reformer (Feb. 19, 2026),
https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/02/19/lawyers-filed-over-1000-lawsuits-challenging-
immigrant-detentions-during-operation-metro-surge/ (last accessed June 5, 2026)
[https://perma.cc/3XPY-ARJ2].

3 While this Order concerns issues related to Petitioners’ physical property, the factual and
procedural history relating to Petitioners’ arrests may be found in previous Or ders in each
respective case.
CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 3 of 7
4

Rosmary N.A. v. Easterwood) to address Respondents’ ongoing failure to comply with the
Court’s orders to return all of Petitioners’ property. Each Petitioner had counsel present
to speak on their behalf. U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota Daniel Rosen and a
representative from the St. Paul Field Office of U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement spoke on behalf of Respondents. Respondents indica ted their intent to
continue searching for Petitioners’ property and committed to fulfill any claims for lost
property that Petitioners wished to file under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).
Following the hearing, the Court issued an Order directing Respondents to: (1)
facilitate the replacement of any missing employee authorization documents; (2)
“facilitate and reimburse all FTCA claims submitted by Petitioners” for lost property; and
(3) return any physical property that is ultimately found. J.B.C.O. v. Bondi , Civ. No. 26-
424, 2026 WL 638455, at *6 (D. Minn. Mar. 6, 2026). The Co urt stated that “[a]bsent
prompt resolution of Petitioners’ property claims, the Court will issue a further order to
show cause regarding the necessity of daily civil fines to ensure compliance” with the
Court’s orders. Id. The Court also scheduled a hearin g for 30 days after the issuance of
the Court’s March 6 Order. Id.
Thereafter, the parties kept the Court a ppraised of Respondents’ ongoing efforts
to remedy Petitioners’ property issues , and the Court twice continued further
proceedings.
The parties have now repres ented to the Court that a ll disputes relating to
Petitioners’ property have been resolved.
CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 4 of 7
5

• In J.B.C.O. v. Bondi, Respondents returned some of the Petitioners’ identification
documents and facilitated the replacemen t of one of the other Petitioner’s
employment authorization documents. ( See Civ. No. 26-424, Docket No. 36.)
Judgment has been entered in that case.
• In S.M. v. Bondi , Petitioner’s personal belongings were eventually returned, but
she submitted an FTCA claim relating to the costs imposed by her detention,
including those related to her lack of access to her cell phone (which was not
returned until weeks after she had been released from custody). The parties have
advised the Court that Petitioner has received payment. ( See Civ. No. 26-639,
Docket No. 54.)
• In Christian A.S.C. v. Bondi , Petitioner’s missing iden tification documents were
eventually located and returned to Petitioner but only after he had been without
any identity document or his driver’s license for weeks. ( See Civ. No. 26-778,
Docket No. 18.) Petitioner Christian A.S.C. also submitted an FTCA claim relating
to his detention, and the parties have advised the Court that Petitioner has
received payment. (See Civ. No. 26-778, Docket No. 36.)
• In Rosmary N.A. v. Easterwood , a backpack containing Petitioner’s belongings
(including a phone, watch, and other item s) was finally returned to her. ( See Civ.
No. 26-832, Docket No. 33.) While Petitioner Rosmar y N.A. reported $42 in
currency was missing from the backpack, Petitioner did not file an FTCA claim
CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 5 of 7
6

following the Court’s March 6, 2026 Order. Judgment has been entered in that
case.
• In Riky A.M.L. v. Bondi, Respondents returned Petitioner’s social security card and
facilitated the replacement of Petitioner ’s employment authorization document.
(See Civ. No. 26-1429, Docket No. 19.) Petition er Riky A.M.L. al so filed an FTCA
claim stemming from his detention seek ing compensation for tools lost by
Respondents—tools that he needed to perform his job. The parties have advised
the Court that Petitioner has received payment. (Civ. No. 26-1429, Docket No. 39.)
Because no ongoing issues related to Respo ndents compliance with this Court’s orders
remain, the Court will enter judgment in the remaining open cases (Civil Nos. 26-639, 26-
778, and 26-1429).
The Court remains troubled that its intervention was necessary to compel
compliance with its orders, and to ensure th e safety, liberty, and well-being of persons
who were subject to unlawful arrest and detention. The Court regrets the hardship
imposed on Petitioners by the United States Government.

CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 6 of 7
7

ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the file s, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that Civil Cases 26-639, 26-778, and 26-1429 shall be closed.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

DATED: June 8, 2026
at Minneapolis, Minnesota. JOHN R. TUNHEIM
United States District Judge
CASE 0:26-cv-00778-JRT-LIB Doc. 38 Filed 06/09/26 Page 7 of 7

Passage view · GavelSight