Minnesota is seeking to accelerate the discovery process in its legal challenge against the Trump administration’s contentious immigration enforcement in the state, as indicated in a federal court document submitted on Thursday.

In a 16-page document backing the request for expedited discovery, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison emphasizes the urgency, citing an ongoing “unprecedented occupation” as a primary concern.

In December 2025, a large-scale enforcement effort dubbed “Operation Metro Surge” saw hundreds of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers conducting sweeps in Minneapolis and St. Paul. This initiative, later described by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as the most extensive immigration enforcement action ever undertaken, has sparked significant controversy.

The plaintiffs, who are pushing to halt the operation, are now seeking rapid access to internal government documents, written interrogations, and depositions from some of the ICE field agents involved.

According to the memorandum, “Operation Metro Surge is not only illegally intrusive; it has proven deadly.” It notes that two Minnesota residents died at the hands of the agents, and criticizes the operation for its militarized raids, racial profiling, and excessive force, which allegedly continue unchecked, compromising public safety and welfare.

Minnesota’s legal team plans to swiftly file a motion for a preliminary injunction and is requesting “limited expedited discovery” to aid in preparing this motion.

The AG’s lawsuit is one of several filed in response to the Trump administration’s ongoing actions in Minnesota.

While other litigation has resulted in quick wins for the plaintiffs — though some of those have since been overturned on appeal — and voluble dressings-down of the defendants, the court overseeing the state’s official legal reaction has been a bit more muted.

On Jan. 26, during a hearing, U.S. District Judge Katherine M. Menendez, a Joe Biden appointee, appeared skeptical both of the federal government’s stated motivations for the crackdown as well as her ability to cabin the behavior of ICE and other federal agents.

On Jan. 31, Menendez denied a motion for a temporary restraining order — while maintaining her skepticism of both sides.

“Because there is evidence supporting both sides’ arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side’s competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction,” the judge opined in a 30-page order.

But that was then, Minnesota says, arguing the fast pace of the action on the ground necessitates quick adaptation in the halls of justice.

“Plaintiffs respectfully ask the Court to allow the Parties to develop this factual record in a timely manner commensurate with the urgency of the situation,” the memo reads.

In the intervening days, Trump administration officials have “lied multiple times” about the level and types of force used against protesters across the country in similar actions, the filing alleges.

And, perhaps even more importantly, the plaintiffs say a series of leaked DHS memos shows federal agents have been authorized “to act unlawfully, including asserting sweeping authority to forcibly enter people’s homes without a judicial warrant and to make warrantless arrests of people they believe are undocumented immigrants if they are ‘likely to escape’ before an arrest warrant can be obtained.”

Such developments, in the context of the court’s earlier skepticism, warrant a speed run on at least some discovery, the plaintiffs argue.

“To address the factual questions raised by the Court’s order, Defendants’ declarations, and recently leaked DHS internal memos, Plaintiffs move for limited expedited discovery to bolster the record,” the motion goes on. “The Court has raised factual questions about the motivations underlying Operation Metro Surge and Defendants’ declarations and the leaked DHS memos raise factual questions about Defendants’ policies, practices, training, or rules of engagement with Minnesota residents.”

The filing outlines what Minnesota is looking for:

First, Plaintiffs seek documents related to the decision to launch Operation Metro Surge and deploy thousands of Defendants’ agents to Minnesota as well as documents related to Defendants’ policies, practices, training, or rules of engagement with Minnesota residents. Discovery may also include written reports or summaries of enforcement actions, incident reports, body camera footage, or conduct complaints received by the CBP and ICE Offices of Professional Responsibility. Second, Plaintiffs seek tailored written discovery regarding the justifications for and objectives of Operation Metro Surge, including information about Minnesota residents targeted and arrested during the surge and ICE’s ability to carry out arrests and deportations of individuals with ICE detainers, among other things. Third, Plaintiffs will also seek to depose Defendants’ declarants.

The memo goes on to request tight deadlines should the discovery request be granted. If the court grants the underlying motion, Minnesota wants the Trump administration to respond to its written discovery requests within seven days and to depose the relevant field agents within 14 days of the would-be order.