Minnesota Dems Sue ICE to Protect Criminal Illegal Aliens, Get Smacked Down on CNN [WATCH]

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig criticized lawsuits filed by Minnesota and Illinois seeking to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement from carrying out federal law enforcement within their borders, arguing that the actions are driven more by politics than by viable legal arguments.

Honig said he reviewed both filings and concluded that the lawsuits lack legal grounding and rely instead on broad political rhetoric aimed at opposing federal immigration enforcement.

“I’ve read both the Minnesota and Illinois lawsuits. They’re really political diatribes masquerading as lawsuits,” Honig said.

According to Honig, both states are asking courts to take an unprecedented step by effectively removing a federal law enforcement agency from operating within their jurisdictions.

“If you look at what both states are asking the courts to do, it’s to kick ICE out of those states and cities and to bar ICE from carrying on federal law enforcement in Illinois and Minnesota,” Honig said.

“That’s the top thing both states asked to do, and they cite zero precedent for that.  for that.”

Honig said the requests outlined in the lawsuits go far beyond what federal courts have the authority to order, particularly when it comes to enforcing laws passed by Congress.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

“There is no way a judge can say, you federal law enforcement agency, you are not allowed to execute federal law in a certain state or city,” he said.

He explained that even if judges were sympathetic to the states’ political concerns, their legal options would be extremely limited. Honig said courts could scrutinize ICE practices but could not block the agency from enforcing federal statutes.

“I think the most that the states could get out of this, if they get sympathetic judges, is a judge who is going to ask questions of ICE, who’s going to hold hearings? Who’s going to demand questions about how they’re training, how they’re carrying out their policy?” Honig said.

Honig added that judges could also issue rulings that are largely symbolic rather than substantive.

“You also could have judges that issue sort of symbolic orders along the lines of ICE, you are not to violate the law, but that’s already the case,” he said.

“It’s already not allowed for ICE to violate the law.”

Honig characterized the lawsuits as coordinated efforts that appear designed to influence public opinion rather than achieve meaningful legal outcomes.

“So these lawsuits, which appear to be coordinated, they’re potentially powerful political statements,” he said, “but I don’t give them much of a chance of achieving the legal thing that they’re asking for in the courts.”

WATCH: