ICE Re-Arrests After Habeas Release Draw Minnesota Judge’s Warning

A Minnesota federal judge says ICE never truly freed a man it re-detained steps from the exit, and has threatened sanctions if it does not let him go.

ICE re-arrests of immigrants moments after federal judges order them freed have drawn a fresh rebuke in Minnesota, where U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan found that the agency “failed to release” an Ecuadorian asylum applicant it picked up again before he got outside the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, MPR News reported Oct. 28. Bryan ordered Milton Saltos Velasquez, 45, released immediately and warned the government it could face sanctions. The question for every detainee who wins a habeas case is whether a court-ordered release means anything if officers are waiting at the door.

According to MPR, Saltos was told around noon on Oct. 19 that he was being released, then handcuffed, processed again and driven toward the Kandiyohi County Jail before a radio call turned the convoy around. ICE told MPR it complied with the order when it first let him go. MPR has now confirmed seven such instant re-arrests in Minnesota.

How Minnesota judges have handled each ICE re-arrest

Two judges have treated the re-arrest as a failure to obey their orders. A third wanted more facts first.

Re-arrest	Judge	What the court did
Sept. 9	Jeffrey Bryan	Reviewed ICE’s own video, found agents “swarmed” the man and flashed a folded warrant for no more than three seconds; ordered a second release
Oct. 2	Jerry Blackwell	Found his immediate-release order unmet after a government report said the man was released “for three minutes”; ordered the government to explain why it should not be held in contempt. The man was freed Oct. 5
Oct. 19	Jeffrey Bryan	Found ICE “failed to release” Saltos Velasquez; ordered immediate release under threat of sanctions
Two cases, dates not reported	Chief Judge Eric Tostrud	Oct. 1 order said the re-arrest “perhaps” violated the release order but declined to rule quickly without more information; both men remain detained

In the Sept. 9 case, Bryan wrote that treating such a re-arrest as a genuine release would “render habeas relief meaningless,” and that no reasonable person, stopped the instant he walked out of a detention facility, would feel free to leave.

The government’s position, as ICE stated it to MPR in the Saltos case, is that it did what the court ordered when it processed him out. The legal question underneath is how far a habeas judgment reaches: whether a ruling that one detention was unlawful also limits officers who make a new arrest, with a new warrant, minutes later. DHS and ICE did not answer MPR’s broader questions about the practice.

Why the fight is landing in Minnesota now

The re-arrests are a byproduct of the habeas wave set off by the administration’s position that people who entered without inspection can be held without a bond hearing until removal. Federal habeas petitions rose from 105 in March 2025 to 9,059 in March 2026, according to data compiled by TRAC at Syracuse University. From October 2025 through March 2026, Minnesota’s federal court received about 1,200 of the 31,357 filed nationwide, the sixth-highest total of any district.

Those wins are getting harder. MPR notes that the Eighth Circuit sided with the administration’s reading of the detention statute in March, and the Supreme Court has agreed to take up the bond-hearing question; the full Fifth Circuit last week rejected a due process claim to a bond hearing. With fewer petitions succeeding, a re-arrest that undoes a grant within minutes carries more weight.

What comes next for detainees and the government

Bryan’s order covers only Saltos. It does not bar ICE from ever detaining him again on a lawful basis; it requires that the ordered release actually happen. Judges can enforce their orders, demand an accounting of the re-arrest and, as a federal judge in Pennsylvania did on Oct. 26, hold officials in civil contempt. Some already require proof of compliance: Blackwell’s order called for a filing within 48 hours confirming the time, date and place of release. More judges are likely to follow.

Any contempt finding is likely to be appealed. The Justice Department is already asking the Eighth Circuit to erase a contempt finding against a government lawyer in a Minnesota habeas case. The open question is whether the Eighth Circuit treats an instant re-arrest as a fresh exercise of ICE’s arrest power or as a way around a court’s judgment. Its answer would bind federal courts in seven states.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice.

Sources

• MPR News: Minnesota immigration re-arrest case, judge threatens ICE with contempt, sanctions (Oct. 28, 2026)
• MPR News: Instant re-arrests at the Whipple Federal Building (Oct. 13, 2026)
• MPR News: Detainees re-arrested after release orders (Oct. 5, 2026)
• TRAC, Syracuse University: Surge in Immigration Lawsuits Hits Record High in 2026 (data through March 2026)

About the Author

Vasanth Vaidyanathan, Esq.

Administrator

Vasanth Vaidyanathan is an immigration attorney with over 20 years of experience focused exclusively on U.S. immigration and nationality law. He holds a LL.M. from California Western School of Law, San Deigo and advises individuals and businesses on employment and family-based immigration matters, including H-1B, PERM, EB categories, and adjustment of status. He has also been a featured speaker at immigration seminars across the U.S. To reach Vasanth visit: https://www.vnathan.com/

Author's website Author's posts