The Justice Department is telling a federal court that the constitutional claims raised in a Minnesota lawsuit to block U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the state are "legally frivolous."

In a memorandum filed with the U.S. District Court in Minnesota on Monday, the department argued against a motion made by the state of Minnesota, and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, for a temporary injunction, CBS News reported.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez, a Biden appointee, is considering whether to grant an immediate temporary restraining order limiting ICE activities in Minnesota.

The lawsuit, filed late last week, argues that the surge of about 3,000 federal agents is endangering citizens, and accuses ICE of violating the First and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The DOJ argued in its memorandum that the plaintiffs' "Tenth Amendment and related claims have not a shred of legal support" and that their "motion should therefore be denied."

"The Tenth Amendment at the heart of Plaintiffs' claims is far different from the Tenth Amendment in the Constitution, which states only a 'truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered,'" the memorandum said. "Among the powers the States did not retain at ratification is the power to veto federal action justified under one of the federal government's enumerated powers."

According to the lawsuit, federal law enforcement officers have "engaged in unlawful conduct" that harms residents and "infringes" on state and local police powers. The DOJ argued against those claims, saying, "Defendants are in Minnesota to enforce federal immigration law, not to run (or close) schools or enforce Minnesota state law."

The lawsuit also alleges that Department of Homeland Security agents have conducted warrantless arrests, citing an instance on Dec. 5 when a federal agent entered a Minneapolis restaurant without a warrant. When the restaurant's general manager asked for a warrant, the agent allegedly said, "We don't need one."