A federal judge in Minnesota denied the Trump administration’s last-minute bid to remove him from an immigration habeas case, citing procedural failures and no real conflict.
Case Background
Petitioner Tong X., a Laos national, filed a habeas corpus petition in late February 2026. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan (Biden appointee) granted unopposed release on February 23, ordering DHS to return all property without new conditions. DHS didn’t comply, prompting a compliance hearing and contempt proceeding set for Monday.
Recusal Request Denied
On Thursday, DOJ (for DHS) sought Bryan’s recusal, arguing his wife, Minnesota Solicitor General Elizabeth Kramer, represents the state in a lawsuit against “Operation Metro Surge”—a massive December 2025 ICE roundup in Minneapolis-St. Paul, dubbed the largest ever by the administration. Minnesota sued in January over federalism issues.
Bryan rejected it forcefully:
- Timing failure: Motion came post-ruling, despite DOJ knowing of his marriage for months (via casual talks and prior recusals).
- Procedural bars: No pre-filing meet-and-confer with petitioner’s counsel; violated local rules.
- No merit: State’s suit involves broad Operation Metro Surge claims, unrelated to this habeas issue (just documenting property return). Habeas focuses on detention lawfulness—unaffected by his wife’s role. “No reasonable person” would see bias.
Key quote from order: “Such allegations have no bearing on the subject of a habeas petition: the lawfulness of a petitioner’s detention.”
Broader Context
This fits amid ~1,000 similar habeas cases in the district since December 2025, challenging detentions from the surge. The ruling highlights strict Eighth Circuit standards and DOJ’s tactical delays, keeping Tong X.’s release intact pending property proof.
Judges often deny recusal on spousal ties unless direct involvement exists—here, timelines and irrelevance sealed the denial. Hearing proceeds as scheduled.
