A federal judge has blocked the removal of a 5-year-old boy and his father detained by ICE in Minnesota, criticizing the agency’s deportation practices and calling for more humane treatment of families.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked the removal of a 5-year-old Minnesota boy and his father who were taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) last week. The child was apprehended shortly after arriving home from preschool, with his father present in their driveway, according to school officials.
Both father and son were taken to a federal detention facility in Texas despite having a pending asylum case and no formal deportation order. The Department of Homeland Security alleged the father abandoned his son, a claim disputed by the family and school representatives.
“Another adult living in the home was outside and begged the agents to let them take care of the small child, but was refused,” school officials said. ICE Minneapolis director Marcos Charles maintained that the household initially refused to take the boy but stressed the agency aims to reunite families when possible.
In his order, U.S. District Judge David Biery sharply criticized ICE’s enforcement methods, calling the agency’s pursuit of daily deportation quotas “ill-conceived and incompetently implemented,” noting it traumatizes children. He described the actions as driven by “perfidious lust for unbridled power” and a disregard for human decency.
While the judge acknowledged that the father and son may eventually return to their home country, he emphasized it should occur “through a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place.” The court included a photo of the boy taken during his detention in the ruling.
Columbia Heights Public Schools, where the child is enrolled, welcomed the decision. “We want all children to be released from detention centers and the reunification of families who have been unjustly separated,” the district said in a statement.
The temporary ruling ensures the family remains in the U.S. while a habeas case challenging their detention moves forward.
