Government Lawyer Yanked From Immigration Detail in Minnesota After Telling Judge ‘This Job Sucks’

A government attorney assigned to assist with immigration litigation in Minnesota was removed from her detail after telling a federal judge that her work and the immigration system “suck,” highlighting intense strain on the Justice Department under the Trump administration’s immigration surge.

By Maria Rodriguez – Senior Staff Writer

Last Updated: Feb. 4, 2026

Abrupt Withdrawal After Courtroom Outburst

Julie Le, an attorney detailed from the Department of Homeland Security to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota, was abruptly pulled from her assignment after an extraordinary exchange with U.S. District Judge Jerry Blackwell. During a hearing in St. Paul, which focused on why federal immigration authorities had repeatedly failed to comply with court orders, Le openly expressed her frustration, telling the judge, “the system sucks, this job sucks.” Her candid remarks underscored the mounting pressure on government lawyers handling a flood of immigration detention cases linked to the Trump administration’s enforcement surge. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

Mounting Case Load and Systemic Strain

Le had been assigned at least 88 immigration-related cases in less than a month, according to court records, as federal courts in Minnesota have been inundated with habeas petitions from people challenging their detentions. ICE officials acknowledged that the surge in Minnesota has become its largest immigration operation since early January, straining personnel and judicial resources. Several other prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota have reportedly left amid frustration with the pace of litigation and the scale of enforcement operations. :contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}

Judge Criticizes Government Compliance

Judge Blackwell did not excuse the government’s failures, stressing that the volume of cases was no justification for failing to comply with court orders — including releases of detainees ordered freed. He noted that people arrested in immigration enforcement actions were sometimes kept in custody for days past their legal release dates, deepening concerns about procedural fairness and respect for judicial authority. Le’s remarks came in response to repeated judicial queries about such noncompliance, illustrating the tense dynamic between the judiciary and federal immigration enforcement. :contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}

Attorney’s Admission and Training Issues

Le acknowledged during the hearing that she had volunteered for the temporary detail only to find herself undertrained and overwhelmed. She said she wanted to resign from the assignment but could not find a replacement, making clear that the Justice Department’s staffing and guidance on immigration litigation were inadequate. Her statements highlighted internal challenges within the Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department when tasked with managing high‑volume, high‑stakes immigration cases. :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}

Responses and Broader Context

The Department of Homeland Security described Le’s comments as unprofessional, while federal officials emphasized their commitment to enforcing immigration law and complying with court orders. The incident comes amid heightened scrutiny of immigration enforcement tactics in Minnesota, where federal operations have been politically contentious. Legal advocates have also criticized systemic detention practices, arguing that many immigrants have been detained without adequate legal basis. This episode reflects broader tensions over federal immigration policy, judicial oversight, and institutional capacity. :contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}