Minnesota Judge Jeffrey Bryan Says Marriage to Solicitor General Doesn’t Create Appearance of Partiality, Denies U.S. Attorney’s Recusal Request

On Saturday, March 14, 2026, the Minnesota Star Tribune reported that U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan declined to recuse himself from an immigration case, despite calls from U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen for his disqualification. Rosen cited Bryan’s marriage to Minnesota Solicitor General Liz Kramer as creating an appearance of partiality.

Judge Bryan issued an order on Friday stating that no reasonable person would believe his marriage to Kramer, who is the lead counsel in Minnesota’s lawsuit against the Trump administration’s immigration surge, would influence his view on the immigration case. He dismissed Rosen’s claim that he had not disclosed his marriage, referring to it as a well-known fact mentioned in numerous court filings in cases where he recused himself due to the involvement of the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office and the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Rosen filed a motion on Thursday, asserting that Bryan’s impartiality could be questioned after learning about the marriage through public media sources. He argued that the arguments presented by Kramer in the state’s lawsuit against Operation Metro Surge mirrored those in the immigration case overseen by Bryan, drawing parallels between the allegations of warrantless arrests, racial profiling, and arrests of U.S. citizens during the surge of federal immigration agents in Minnesota.

Judge Bryan dismissed Rosen’s claim as unpersuasive, stating that the arguments were merely general background facts about Operation Metro Surge, which the U.S. government has not disputed in over 1,000 habeas cases filed since December 1. He also stated that the arguments in the state’s lawsuit are fundamentally different from the immigrant’s habeas case, which seeks to challenge the immigrant’s detention.

Bryan added that Rosen had not met with the immigrant’s attorney before filing his recusal request, violating court rules. Daniel Suitor, the immigrant’s attorney, expressed surprise at the motion and later filed a motion opposing the recusal request.

Source: Minnesota Star Tribune