CC WS PACKET 02042026 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 4936-0413-5952\4 Analysis: The states and their political subdivisions “historically possess police power to protect public health and safety.” R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. City of Edina, 60 F.4th 1170, 1176 (8th Cir. 2021) (citing U.S. Const. amend. X). The State of Minnesota has delegated authority to the City to enforce traffic laws and regulate motor vehicles. Minn. Stat. § 169.04. That said, Minnesota protects the owners of private property to “authorize . . . the towing of a motor vehicle unlawfully parked on the private property.” Minn. Stat. § 168B.035, subd. 6. Accordingly. St. Anthony must respect this limitation on its ability to preclude towing. Question: May St. Anthony intervene in ongoing federal litigation regarding ICE operations? Answer: St. Anthony may intervene, but should consider the best mechanism, and must consider whether the expense justifies the outcome. Analysis: The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow St. Anthony to intervene in federal suits as a party if it has a sufficient legFed. R. Civ. P. 24. Intervention will be a matter for district court discretion. Keech v. Sanimax USA, LLC, No. 18-0683 (JRT/HB), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9752, at *6 (D. Minn. Jan. 21, 2020). Moreover, intervening as a party would require participating actively in the suit, and would bind St. Anthony to any judgments and orders. St. Anthony may also choose to submit an amicus curiae brief, where it expresses its opinion on the case but is not a party. Federal courts have broad discretion to permit the filing of amicus curiae briefs where such submission may assist the Court. See, e.g., S.E.C. v. Carebourn Capital, L.P., No. 21- cv-2114 (KMM/JFD), 2023 WL 4947458, at *1 (D. Minn. Aug. 3, 2023) (“A determination on a request to participate as amicus curiae is discretionary, and the court may grant or refuse leave according as it deems the proffered information timely, useful, or otherwise.” (quotation omitted)). This is a less risky option because it would not bind St. Anthony to any ensuing judgments or expose it to liability. III. Conclusion Put simply, St. Anthony may legislate to mitigate ICE operations, but any resulting ordinance may not specifically burden or discriminate against federal or ICE officials. St. Anthony may also attempt to intervene in ongoing federal litigation protesting ICE actions but should consider whether the time and effort justifies the expense.