The Trump administration faced two legal setbacks on Monday, with a federal judge holding officials in contempt over an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) transfer and Maryland suing to block a new detention center.
Newsweek has contacted the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for comment via email.
Immigration enforcement has been a central tenet of the second Trump administration, sparking legal clashes between state officials and the federal government over ICE operations. Such cases signal the growing resistance to the administration's agenda and test the limits of federal immigration authority.
A federal judge in Minnesota ruled that the Trump administration acted in civil contempt after ICE transferred a detainee out of state in direct violation of a court order.
U.S. District Judge Eric Tostrud found that ICE moved the man from Minnesota to Texas despite explicit instructions not to do so.
After being transferred to El Paso, the detainee was released without his personal belongings.
The court rejected explanations such as bad weather or confusion and found the government responsible for the financial harm caused by disobeying the order.
Tostrud ordered the administration to reimburse $568.29 -- the cost of a plane ticket for the man to return home -- calling the government's conduct a clear breach of the court's authority.
The ruling followed a habeas corpus petition filed by the detainee, identified in court documents as a Mexican citizen, seeking either release or a bond hearing.
Specifically, a habeas corpus petition is a legal request asking a judge to decide whether the government is lawfully detaining someone and to order their release if it is not.
The judge had issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the man's removal from Minnesota while the case was under review.
Separately, Maryland filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration seeking to halt construction of a large ICE detention facility in Washington County.
The complaint argues that federal officials violated environmental and public‑input requirements when purchasing a warehouse intended for conversion into an immigration detention center.
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said the facility was approved without required environmental review or consultation with state and local officials.
State leaders are asking a court to stop construction and block the project unless federal agencies comply with those legal obligations.
ICE and the Department of Homeland Security have said the facility will meet federal detention standards and is part of efforts to expand detention capacity nationwide.
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said in a video address posted on social media: "We're asking the court to halt construction and operation of this facility. We're asking the court to require a proper environmental review with full public input, and we're asking the court to declare that what the administration did here was unlawful."
He added in a separate news release: "DHS purchased this while keeping the State and the public in the dark, spending more than $100 million in federal taxpayer dollars without performing the required environmental review and without giving Maryland or Marylanders any voice in the process. We will not allow this Administration to treat laws like suggestions and threaten our people or their communities."
The Attorney General's Office wrote in a news release about the lawsuit: "According to DHS, the federal government intends to convert this industrial warehouse into a detention center capable of housing 1,500 people at a time. Williamsport itself is home to just over 2,000 residents -- meaning this facility alone would nearly match the town's entire population."
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesperson said, regarding the Maryland case: "These will not be warehouses -- they will be very well-structured detention facilities meeting our regular detention standards. Every day, DHS is conducting law enforcement activities across the country to keep Americans safe."
Both cases now move deeper into the courts, sharpening legal scrutiny of how the Trump administration carries out ICE enforcement and detention plans.