On a chilly April morning, Brenda Lewis, the superintendent of Fridley Public Schools, stood with reporters outside the Warren Burger Federal Court Building in St. Paul and attempted to explain what her district had been going through. Situated in a community with a significant immigrant population north of Minneapolis, Fridley is a small district with approximately 2,800 students. Attendance in her district fell by 33% during the weeks of Operation Metro Surge in February 2026, when federal immigration officers descended upon the Twin Cities in a concerted enforcement effort. The district completely canceled classes on two different days in January because so many students chose to stay at home. Lewis had appeared in federal court to request that a judge put an end to it.
Judge Laura Provinzino declined on May 6.
The preliminary injunction that Fridley Public Schools, Duluth Public Schools, and Education Minnesota had requested was denied in a 38-page ruling by Provinzino, a Biden appointee, which made her decision particularly pointed in some quarters. She was faced with a limited legal question: had the plaintiffs proven they were likely to prevail on the merits and that the policy change under challenge directly caused them irreversible harm? They hadn’t, she discovered. Although she acknowledged the “significant emotional toll” on teachers who assisted students and families in navigating the surge, the plaintiffs were unable to demonstrate that the harms were specifically caused by the 2025 policy memo rather than by a more general increase in enforcement activity that might have occurred regardless.
The policy itself was not new. The U.S. government has designated schools, hospitals, and places of worship as “sensitive locations” where immigration enforcement is discouraged since 1993. In 2021, that policy was updated and strengthened. The Department of Homeland Security revoked it on January 1, 2025, the first day of President Trump’s second term. In February 2026, the school districts and Education Minnesota filed a lawsuit, claiming that the rescission violated the Administrative Procedures Act by not adhering to the correct rulemaking procedure.
The plaintiffs were uncomfortable with Provinzino’s main conclusion: she pointed out that immigration enforcement near schools was never forbidden under the previous policy. The government’s willingness to act, not its legal authority, was altered by the 2025 guidelines. The legal pivot that closed the door on the injunction was that distinction between authority and willingness. “The 2025 Guidance, in short, did not change DHS’s ability or authority to engage in enforcement activity at or near protected areas,” she said. “What has changed, evidently, is DHS’s willingness.”
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Case Name | Fridley Public School District (ISD 14) et al. v. Mullin |
| Filing Date | February 2026 |
| Ruling Date | May 6, 2026 |
| Presiding Judge | U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino (Biden appointee) |
| Ruling Length | 38 pages |
| Ruling | Preliminary injunction denied |
| Plaintiffs | Fridley Public Schools, Duluth Public Schools, Education Minnesota (teachers union) |
| Defendant | Department of Homeland Security |
| Policy Challenged | January 2025 executive order rescinding “sensitive locations” protections near schools |
| Prior Policy | Established 1993, last revised 2021 — discouraged ICE enforcement near schools, hospitals, houses of worship |
| Operation in Question | Operation Metro Surge (February 2026, Twin Cities) |
| Fridley Attendance Drop | 33% during Operation Metro Surge |
| Classes Cancelled | Twice in January (Fridley) due to mass student absences |
| Notable Incident | Border Patrol deployed chemical irritants on students/staff outside Roosevelt High School, Minneapolis |
| Plaintiffs’ Attorney | Amanda Cialkowski |
| DOJ Attorney | Jessica Lundberg |
| Fridley Superintendent | Brenda Lewis |
| Duluth Spokeswoman | Adelle Wellens |
| Case Status | Ongoing — preliminary injunction denied but lawsuit continues |
Beyond the legal arguments, there is something that sticks with you when you watch the details that came to light during this case. Amanda Cialkowski, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, described how ICE cars would pull up in front of an elementary school while playing “Ice Ice Baby” on their radios during the April court hearing. She told of Americans being hauled out of their vehicles while holding their passports. She detailed how Border Patrol agents used chemical irritants on employees and students outside Minneapolis’ Roosevelt High School. These accounts seemed to genuinely worry the judge. She continued to be in charge of the government.
The decision was referred to by the Department of Homeland Security as “a victory for the rule of law and common sense.” A spokesperson reaffirmed that the administration would not prevent law enforcement from taking action in the event that a dangerous person, for instance, fled onto school property and that ICE was not going to schools to arrest children. Although the denial of the preliminary injunction was a major setback, the plaintiffs said in a joint statement that the case would go on.
The future course is still unknown. The school districts’ request for immediate relief, which would have prevented enforcement actions near schools while the case was being decided, is no longer available, but the lawsuit still proceeds on its merits. For the time being, families and students in Fridley and Duluth, as well as throughout the Twin Cities districts most impacted by the surge, navigate a school year knowing that the protections that were in place for over thirty years no longer apply, and that a court has declined to restore them, at least temporarily.
