The American Civil Liberties Union requested a reinstatement of constraints on federal officers’ tactics against protesters in Minnesota after federal officers in Minneapolis fatally shot a 37-year-old man.
U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez agreed to impose constraints earlier this month, but the move was temporarily lifted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit on Wednesday. The ACLU is now arguing that the situation has escalated to an extent that the restraints are more urgently needed.
NOEM TELLS AMERICANS TO STAY ‘ALERT’ AHEAD OF MASSIVE WEEKEND SNOW STORM
The plaintiffs argued that in light of heightened tensions, “it is more essential than ever to reinstate the district court’s narrow, considered injunction to prevent violent retaliation against individuals exercising their constitutional rights.”
“Intervening events that post-date the parties’ filings have created an urgent need for intervention to prevent irreparable injury to the named plaintiffs, protesters, and observers,” the filing read.
“In these circumstances, every hour that a stay remains in place presents new opportunities for irreparable injury to protesters and observers. To prevent that imminent, irreparable harm, Appellees respectfully request that the Court lift the administrative stay immediately, and in no event later than” Sunday at 5 p.m. Central Time, the filing read.
The restraints, previously briefly imposed by Menendez, include forbidding federal officers from arresting or pepper-spraying protesters if they weren’t directly engaging in violence. She also ruled that closely following ICE vehicles and agents couldn’t warrant a response, nor could crowds forming around officers during operations.
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE FATAL SHOOTING INVOLVING BORDER PATROL IN MINNESOTA
The Department of Justice argued that the ruling endangered public safety and the safety of immigration officers.
“To be clear, plaintiffs cannot establish any constitutional violations. But regardless, the district court’s injunction is legally untenable several times over,” the DOJ’s filing to overturn the motion read.
