ICE Doesn’t Need Permission
Kevin McCullough
5–6 minutes
Apparently, the Constitution now comes with a permission slip.
According to Minnesota’s political class—and the federal judge they are hoping will indulge them—federal immigration law is binding except when local officials find it inconvenient, uncomfortable, or politically risky. In those moments, the thinking goes, the state can simply ask a court to restrain Immigration and Customs Enforcement and call it “constitutional balance.”
Thankfully, the Trump administration is having none of it.
In a sharply worded filing this week, the Department of Justice warned that any judicial order limiting ICE operations inside Minnesota would amount to an “unprecedented overreach.” That phrasing is not hyperbole. It is the legal equivalent of asking whether we have collectively forgotten how the country works.
Because if Minnesota can veto federal immigration enforcement, then federal law is no longer federal. It’s optional. And once law becomes optional, it ceases to be law at all.
Let’s be clear about what Minnesota officials are actually demanding. They are not asking for oversight. They are not negotiating cooperation agreements. They are not challenging Congress’s authority to regulate immigration. They are asking a federal judge to block federal agents from enforcing federal law within a U.S. state because local politicians don’t like how it looks—or who it might offend.
That is not federalism. That is nullification dressed up in modern legal jargon.
more
https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2026/01/21/ice-doesnt-need-permission-n2669814
