@noteiz.bsky.social

Wild she just doesn’t talk about the fact that all the women of color on our body voted down this nominee. Citing issues of representation of communities of color and the inability to name the racism problem within the MPD and its policing. Somehow it’s about a fictional powertrip she invented.

Josh Martin@joshmartinmpls.bsky.social · 11h ago

Of course, after Roper's melancholy, Rochelle Olson says "hold my beer" and acts as the imperator of everything as usual, showing immense disrespect for our elected officials and literally saying they should be begging for Peterson to be the Chief. (1/3)

To Olson, "leadership" apparently means immediate subservience to the mayor. I say again. Minneapolis has 430,000 bosses. And none of them is Rochelle Olson, who doesn't even live here. You can agree or disagree with the council's decision, but this doomcasting is absurd and ridiculous. (3/3)

In my motion, I acknowledged that Miranda case law wasn't a perfect fit, but argued it should be persuasive because, ultimately, the question is what power the Government wielded over my client's person. And I can't figure out what else to argue, because this is such a novel and brazen tactic.

Respondent acknowledges that the decision in Pablo F. relies heavily on caselaw concerning Miranda and habeas proceedings where a petitioner is subject to parole or similar government restrictions, and not circumstances where immigration authorities immediately re-arrest a successful habeas petitioner. But that is because this is a new and brazen tactic Respondents have employed. Besides the nascent case law in this District on this issue,2 Counsel for Petitioner is not aware of other courts to address the dilemma at hand. Perhaps that is because, until recently, our immigration authorities had not been quite so comfortable defying the courts, or at least probing the boundaries of the law to find the lowest possible form of compliance our courts will accept. See, e.g., Juan T.R. v. Noem, No. 26-CV-0107 (PJS/DLM), 2026 WL 555601, at *2 (D. Minn. Feb. 26, 2026) (discussing a previous order which “identified 96 court orders that ICE had violated in 74 cases” and a further “113 additional orders that ICE has violated in 77 additional cases”).
However, Petitioner submits that the Court should consider the analysis in Pablo F. persuasive. Miranda case law concerns whether an individual is in the Government’s custody even when such custody may not be actual imprisonment. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 448 (1966) (“Again we stress that the modern practice of in-custody interrogation is psychologically rather than physically oriented. . . . this Court has recognized that coercion can be mental as well as physical, and that the blood of the accused is not the only hallmark of an unconstitutional inquisition.’” (quotation omitted)). And the line of cases concerning parole are instructive because they consider whether Petitioner was subject to government “restraints not shared by the public generally.” Jonesv. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 240 (1963). In the liminal world between imprisonment and unfettered freedom, the courts considering those issues have had to wrestle with questions of what power the Government holds over an individual at a given point in time. That is the essential question before the Court in this case: did Respondents actually “release Petitioner Alejandro C.G. from immigration custody,” as the Court ordered? Op. & Order, Dkt. 11, at 10.
No, Respondents did not actually release Petitioner from immigration custody. Drawing from Miranda case law concerning custody by interrogating officials, the Pablo F. court noticed that “actual physical custody is typically understood as any significant deprivation of freedom of action and is determined by asking whether, under the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable person would feel free to end the encounter and leave.” 2026 WL 2874903 at *2 (citing cases). It also explained that “[i]n the habeas context, a person is in custody when that person is subject to ‘restraints not shared by the public generally.’” Id. at *2 (quoting Jones, 371 U.S. at 240) The Supreme Court has explained that “what matters is that [conditions and restrictions] significantly restrain petitioner's liberty to do those things which in this country free men are entitled to do. Such restraints are enough to invoke the help of the Great Writ.”3 Jones, 371 U.S. at 243 (discussing a

FN 3 
Beyond parolees like the petitioner in Jones, courts of this District have found that an individual whose supervised release for a criminal offense had been revoked but whose jail-report date had not arrived was “in custody.” Wilson v. Lowry, No. CR 98-00177 (SRN), 2017 WL 5158654, at *3 (D. Minn. Nov. 7, 2017). They have found that an individual under threat of prosecution but found incompetent to stand trial was in custody, pointing out that even a requirement to “keep the government at all times apprised of his address” was a custodial restraint. Ful…

I lost my client's motion to enforce. The Court found that the line of Miranda case law employed by other judges doesn't apply in this context. This means 2 judges in the District of Minnesota have said ICE must actually release people, and 2 have said no. Brutal. drive.google.com/file/d/1mkap...

On October 12, 2026, Alejandro filed the present motion to enforce. See ECF No. 15. Alejandro seeks his re-release, as well as entry of an order specifying that he not be re-detained unless he commits a subsequent criminal offense or his Board of Immigration Appeals case is decided against him or otherwise dismissed. See id. at 9.
In his motion, Alejandro argues that Respondents’ “sham release,” followed by a rearrest before “actually allowing Petitioner to leave their custody,” violated the September 22 Order granting his release. See ECF No. 15 at 1. Alejandro’s argument is not persuasive. Alejandro relies on Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and United States v. Griffin, 922 F.2d 1343 (8th Cir. 1990), for the premise that he was “in custody” at the time of his rearrest. See ECF No. 15 at 5–7. Both Miranda and Griffin arose in the criminal context, and concerned the admissibility of statements obtained during custodial interrogation. See Miranda, 384 U.S. at 439; Griffin, 922 F.2d at 1345. Those circumstances are not present here, and Alejandro provides no persuasive authority for the premise that being “in custody” under these authorities would direct release from immigration custody as an appropriate remedy. Likewise, even assuming the officer escorting Alejandro shoved him as he was exiting the Whipple Building, something that is denied by Respondents and not depicted in security camera footage, Alejandro provides no persuasive legal authority that would direct his release as the proper remedy. Alejandro was rearrested in a public space after his release was processed and his belongings returned to him. On these facts, Alejandro’s motion to enforce will be denied.
Daniel Suitor@danielsuitor.com · last mo.

My client and I to MPR about this phenomenon. Two other attorneys are quoted talking about their client as well. We're not going to let ICE get away with making a mockery of court orders like this. www.mprnews.org/story/2026/1...

Now, the ball is in Mayor Frey’s court. He can reach for his veto pen like usual, or allow some of the strongest data center regulations to stand and protect our communities from Big Tech’s unchecked expansion.

This means that residents will have a say in whether a data center should be allowed in their community in the first place! And let’s be clear: This victory belongs to the hundreds of residents who organized and demanded that our city put people before Big Tech profits! ✊🏾

BIG UPDATE on the Minneapolis data center fight! 🚨 Yesterday, our proposal to ban data centers fell short by just ONE vote again. But we secured a major victory: the City Council voted to REMOVE primary zoning for data centers!

Bild

I want my trans, Two-Spirit, nonbinary and gender-expansive neighbors to know you are loved and that you belong here. I will keep pushing for the change we need so we stop adding names to this list. I hope to see you all in community for Trans Day of Remembrance. 9/

This includes making sure victims and their loved ones get the support they need, holding institutions accountable for deadnaming the trans people we've lost, and ensuring Minneapolis is a city where trans folks can ask for help without fear. 8/

Trans relatives we lose are disproportionately Black, Indigenous, and Latina trans women and femmes, and too often we only learn of their deaths long after, through incomplete or inaccurate reports about who they were. Trans people deserve to be celebrated in life, not only remembered in death. 6/

Savannah Ryan Williams was 38, an Indigenous Latina trans woman of Cuban descent. She was killed near Lake Street on November 29, 2023. Her loved ones remember her as fierce, generous and full of life, with a big personality and an even bigger heart. 5/

Ra'Lasia Wright was 25, a Black Latina trans woman of Puerto Rican descent. She had called Minneapolis home since she was 10. She was shot and killed near Powderhorn Park on December 1, 2024. Her friends remember her as fiercely loyal, outgoing, protective and loving. 4/

Stella Nez Perce was 36, a Trans-Two Spirit Indigenous woman. She came to Minnesota with her sister looking for safety and acceptance, and she was killed here on October 3, 2026. Her family remembers her as gentle, kind, loving, and a "butterfly coming out of a cocoon." 3/

At today's Minneapolis City Council meeting, we recognized Transgender Day of Remembrance with an honorary resolution. 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️ We honored all the trans, Two-Spirit, nonbinary and gender-expansive people we've lost to violence. 1/ www.mprnews.org/story/2026/1...

‘She was a perfect sister’: Minneapolis resolution honors Transgender Day of Remembrance

Transgender Day of Remembrance, observed Nov. 20., acknowledges transgender people who have died by violence.

mprnews.org

It's become common in politics to convince yourself that you're playing 3d chess when you're just lazy and risk averse. You can achieve a lot with effort, good communication and, yes, a little risk. It's good to reward politicians who try, instead of pretending the ones who don't are secret geniuses

pretty convenient that the one incident billy peterson remembered afterwards is only one of the most flagrant displays of racism from the minneapolis police department during jacob frey's tenure as mayor! and he hadn't remembered anything else in the last 30 years that had gone unreported

Wedge LIVE!™@wedge.live · yesterday

Mayor Frey, defending his police chief nominee's faulty memory: "as soon as he got out of that first meeting [with council members], one of the first things he says to me was 'damnit I forgot about the racist Christmas tree.'"

"streets of minneapolis" is great, but the new nur-d record 'hell' is a piece of art about operation metro surge from someone who was, well, in the streets of minneapolis day in & day out and can speak to what it was like being a rapid responder. "go to hell" captures that rage & determination


Slave catchers in the street
Whistles tell me where they be
Demons ain't coming in chariots
Grab a fistful of your hair
And then drag a baby through the sleet
I ain't losing any sleep
They done burned all of the peace out my body
Now I want them all in a box
Dropped
Slaying the monsters
Gassing our kids on the blockTell me to stop
Why you policing my tone
While mothers out here getting shot
They drag a son from they home
The only one they've ever known
And you want talk
Miss me with all that
Angels ain't coming tonight
Brimstone melts I.C.E
If they come for one of mine
I ain't going to the lightCall up my partner
We roll up to Portland
Don't need no instructions I know where to be
This Minnesota
It's hell frozen over
You know we be sliding when I.C.E. on the streets

i’m sorry but there is no chance that donald trump, a vengeful man who has devoted *two presidences* to destroying the social insurance state and giving the stolen money to his rich friends, would sign a bill extending public health insurance