Federal inquiry targets Minnesota leaders for alleged plot to thwart immigration agents

The U.S. Justice Department is investigating Minnesota officials, including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, over a potential conspiracy to obstruct federal immigration enforcement, multiple sources familiar with the matter told US media.

The probe represents a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s ongoing confrontation with Democratic leaders in the state.

A U.S. official familiar with the investigation said that the inquiry stems from public statements made by Walz and Frey concerning the deployment of thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents to the Minneapolis area in recent weeks. Sources indicate that subpoenas may be issued as part of the investigation. The Justice Department declined to comment.

In response, Mayor Frey described the investigation as an attempt to intimidate him. “This is an obvious attempt to intimidate me for standing up for Minneapolis, our local law enforcement, and our residents against the chaos and danger this Administration has brought to our streets,” Frey said. “I will not be intimidated. My focus will remain where it's always been: keeping our city safe.”

Nearly 3,000 federal immigration agents have been sent to Minneapolis, with the stated goal of arresting individuals suspected of being in the country illegally and investigating allegations of fraud in Minnesota. The Department of Homeland Security has described the operation as the largest of its kind in its history.

The large federal presence has sparked widespread local opposition, including protests and clashes, particularly following the killing of Minnesota resident Renee Good by an ICE officer last week. Both Walz and Frey have strongly criticised the federal deployment, claiming that the aggressive tactics of federal agents have sown chaos and undermined public safety.

According to one federal official, the investigation is centred on 18 U.S.C. § 372, a statute that criminalises conspiracies by two or more individuals to prevent federal officers from performing their official duties through “force, intimidation, or threats.”

Historically, the law has been applied in cases involving coordinated efforts to obstruct federal officials, sometimes including violent acts or threats. Experts note that public criticism of federal policy is generally considered protected speech, provided it does not involve direct coordination or incitement to obstruct law enforcement.

By Tamilla Hasanova