Trump’s immigration victory in a Minnesota court is a win for all law-abiding citizens

Federal court rejects Minnesota's challenge to immigration enforcement, showing that constitutional supremacy still exists and debunking state sovereignty claims.

Contrary to cynical politicians who seek to weaponize misguided individuals into fighting a phantom holy war pitting some states against the national government, Operation Metro Surge is neither unconstitutional nor a violation of states’ rights. Dr. Sandeep Gopalan is a professor at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore. He has held leadership roles in several universities and has a doctorate in law from Oxford, where he was a Rhodes Scholar.

The federal court’s stinging rebuke appears to have quickly forced Minnesota's governor to deliver "unprecedented cooperation" and enable Border Czar Tom Homan to drawdown federal agents on Feb 5th. Here’s why.

Let’s start with how this case got to court. Minnesota’s politicians have been engaged in lawfare against the Trump administration claiming that the federal government is intruding on the state’s sovereignty. They challenged the federal enforcement actions as violative of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Minnesota sought a preliminary injunction to stop Operation Metro Surge.