ICE in Minnesota: A Worrying Shift, According to a Former Trump Lawyer

Thousands Braved the Cold

On January 23, 2026, thousands of Minnesotans braved temperatures as low as -17 degrees Celsius (with a wind chill of up to -37 degrees) to protest the presence of ICE in their city. Organized by a coalition of religious groups, immigrant organizations, and labor unions, this demonstration was one of the largest in Minnesota’s recent history. Organizers handed out hand warmers to protesters as they chanted “ICE out,” waved American flags, and carried signs demanding the arrest of the agent responsible for Renee Good’s death.

The images from the protest are poignant: entire families, elderly people, students—all united against what they consider an unjustified occupation of their city. That very morning, videos showing thousands of people gathered in front of the Minneapolis airport circulated on social media, forming a picket line so long that it stretched the entire length of the departures terminal. Organizers reported that approximately 100 people were detained by police after their “permitted activity exceeded the agreed-upon terms.” Police officers were seen handcuffing protesters with plastic restraints and loading them onto yellow school buses—a scene that sparked outrage across the country.

Community Solidarity

The diversity of the protesters reflects the breadth of the discontent. Mati Hanson, 31, explained that she was protesting because she could, as a white person. “A lot of people aren’t leaving their homes… Those are the people I want to support, since they can’t be here,” she said. Yubi Hassan, 24, a Somali immigrant who arrived in the United States as a teenager, handed out hot tea to protesters gathered at The Commons, a public park in downtown. His friend held up a sign reading “Free Somali tea,” a gesture of solidarity and humanity amid a climate of fear.

Yubi Hassan, who owns a local tea business, explained why he felt it was important to be there despite his fears: “We’ve seen this happen before, haven’t we? It always starts with one group of people, until it spreads to everyone. Today it’s us; tomorrow it could be someone else.” ” This sense of cross-community solidarity was a constant theme at the rally, transcending racial, ethnic, and social divisions. Religious leaders such as Imam Youssef Abdullah addressed the crowd, declaring: “Today, we are not gathering out of fear. We have gathered out of love for our neighbors, for our children, and for our future.”

This demonstration gives me hope. Thousands of people, in the freezing cold, standing together against injustice. Not just the communities directly affected, but allies from all walks of life. People saying, “Enough!” I see faces of all colors, all ages, all backgrounds. Mothers with their children. Students. Workers. Members of the clergy. All united by a single sentiment: what is happening is not right, not American, not acceptable. This is what I want to see in America. Solidarity that transcends differences. A common front against oppression. Peaceful but resolute resistance.

A Paralyzed Economy

The economic impact of Operation “Metro Surge” on the Twin Cities region has been devastating. Businesses in Minneapolis have reported revenue declines ranging from 50 to 80 percent since the start of the massive deployment of federal agents. Many businesses have been forced to close their doors, either out of fear of potential violence or because their customers did not feel safe. The restaurant industry, in particular, has suffered: customers, often from immigrant communities, prefer to stay home rather than risk encounters with ICE agents.

The costs to taxpayers are also astronomical. The Minneapolis Police Department had to work more than 3,000 hours of overtime between January 8 and 11, 2026, alone, at an estimated cost of more than $2 million to taxpayers. This overtime is necessary to handle incidents caused by federal agents’ actions, respond to calls from residents who do not know whether an ICE arrest is an abduction, and maintain order during protests. Emergency resources are also being stretched beyond their normal capacity, creating a dangerous situation for public safety as a whole.

A Society Under Strain

The social consequences of this operation are just as serious. Schools have been forced to go on lockdown several times to protect students, disrupting the education of thousands of children. Children like Liam Conejo Ramos, a 5-year-old boy, have been apprehended by immigration authorities on their way to school, causing widespread panic. Images of Liam were displayed on protesters’ signs with the message “Not bait,” accusing federal authorities of using children as bait to arrest their parents.

Immigrant communities live in a state of constant terror. Abdi Hassan, 19, an American of Somali descent who has lived in the United States since he was 2, recounted that several of his friends have been victims of racial profiling by ICE. “I carry my ID with me everywhere I go, or I could be kidnapped for no reason… It’s been scary lately. It’s terrifying.” This pervasive fear has created a climate of mistrust and anxiety that affects every aspect of daily life, from work to education to social relationships.

What outrages me the most is the use of children as pawns in this macabre political game. Liam, age five, arrested on his way to school. Used as bait to catch his parents. It’s unimaginable. Children should be in school learning, not in detention centers. Parents should be at work providing for their families, not on the run to protect their children. And teachers like Clark Hoelscher shouldn’t have to worry about their students when they don’t show up for class. This is a society fracturing before our very eyes, and no one seems to have the power to stop it.

A Historic Lawsuit

On January 12, 2026, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, on behalf of the state and alongside the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, filed a historic federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security and related agencies. The lawsuit asks the court to halt the unprecedented deployment of DHS agents in the state and to declare it unconstitutional and illegal. The coalition is also seeking a temporary restraining order, citing the immediate harm suffered by the state and the cities.

The complaint alleges that DHS agents have “brazenly and repeatedly used excessive force” against Minnesotans, spreading terror in the Twin Cities and beyond. The allegations are serious: arresting, threatening, and using force against innocent bystanders; using force against people peacefully engaged in speech protected by the Constitution; pointing firearms at individuals who pose no threat; and conducting enforcement actions in sensitive locations such as schools, churches, hospitals, and nursing homes. Attorney General Ellison stated: “The illegal deployment of thousands of armed, masked, and poorly trained federal agents is harming Minnesota. People are being racially profiled, harassed, terrorized, and assaulted. Schools have had to go on lockdown. Businesses have had to close. This federal invasion of the Twin Cities must stop.”

Strong Constitutional Arguments

The complaint is based on strong constitutional arguments. First, it alleges a violation of the First Amendment, which prohibits discrimination based on views and retaliation against the exercise of free speech. Second, it invokes the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the states all powers not delegated to the federal government, including law enforcement and the operation of schools. DHS agents essentially “commissioned” Minnesota’s law enforcement resources by forcing state and local law enforcement officers to clean up the mess caused by federal agents.

Finally, the complaint invokes the principle of sovereign equality between the states and the federal government, which requires that states be treated equally by the federal government. The plaintiffs argue that targeting Minnesota because of its voting patterns and the political views of its leaders constitutes a violation of this principle. The complaint also alleges that the use of excessive force, warrantless arrests, and the targeting of individuals in sensitive locations violate the Administrative Procedure Act, which prohibits arbitrary and capricious actions by federal agencies.

This lawsuit may be the only glimmer of hope in this bleak situation. Attorney Ellison has the courage to say what many think but dare not express: this is not law enforcement; it is political intimidation. The U.S. Constitution protects the states from this kind of arbitrary federal interference. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not just for those who agree with those in power. The Tenth Amendment protects the rights of the states against federal interference. These fundamental principles of our democracy are under attack, and it is time for the courts to defend them.

A Clear Political Motive

The federal complaint convincingly alleges that Operation “Metro Surge” is not motivated by legitimate immigration or public safety concerns, but rather by the Trump administration’s desire to retaliate against its perceived political enemies. President Trump himself explicitly stated that Minnesota was “corrupt” and “dishonest” because its officials had accurately reported election results that did not declare him the winner. “These are dishonest officials… I think I won Minnesota three times. I think I won it all three times, in my opinion… It’s a corrupt electoral state… I won Minnesota three times and didn’t get credit for it. It’s a dishonest state.”

The timing of the operation is also suspicious. It was launched in response to a video by right-wing influencer Nick Shirley alleging widespread fraud at daycare centers run by Somali immigrants. However, the investigation into this alleged fraud dates back to 2020, under the first Trump administration, and it was a Minnesota state agency—the Department of Education—that had alerted federal authorities to suspicious activity. State officials continued to urge the federal government to work with the state in 2021 and 2022 to bring charges in this case. This case was an instance where state and federal resources had worked together to bring the perpetrators to justice—but now, years later, the Trump administration is attempting to repurpose it as a pretext to attack an entire ethnic group and an entire state.

A Pattern of Political Targeting

The allegations of political targeting are supported by the clear pattern of the Trump administration’s federal deployments. Democratic municipalities such as Los Angeles, Portland, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., have all been targeted by similar operations. The Trump administration has also made a habit of repeatedly and illegally attacking the state of Minnesota, both verbally and by attempting to illegally cut off federal funding for programs on which the people of Minnesota depend.

The massive deployment of federal agents in a state with such a small undocumented immigrant population compared to other states that have not been targeted strongly suggests that considerations other than immigration are at play. Attorney General Ellison stated: “Immigration enforcement is clearly a pretext for the operation… The percentage of Minnesota’s population who are non-citizen immigrants without legal status is about 1.5%, which is less than half the national average… If DHS’s goal were to arrest and deport dangerous individuals, as they claim, this would not be achieved by their practice of randomly stopping people on the street to demand proof of citizenship.”

Ty Cobb’s Perspective

The testimony of Ty Cobb, a former White House counsel under the first Trump administration, is particularly significant. In an interview on NBC News’ Meet the Press, Cobb stated that ICE was acting in a “totally abusive” and “out-of-bounds” manner in Minnesota. This criticism coming from a former Trump administration insider lends weight to the allegations of overreach. Cobb explained that the administration was acting outside its constitutional authority—an explosive statement from someone who served at the highest levels of government.

This testimony is all the more powerful given that Cobb is not a regular critic of the Trump administration. As a former White House legal counsel, he is intimately familiar with the constitutional limits of executive power. His decision to speak out publicly against the current administration’s actions underscores the gravity of the situation. It is a sign that even those who served in the Trump administration recognize that current actions are crossing a dangerous line.

When a former White House lawyer for Trump says the administration is acting “out of bounds,” it means we’re in uncharted territory. Ty Cobb is no radical leftist. He’s a Republican who served in the administration. If he says it’s abusive, it’s truly abusive. It’s as if your own doctor were telling you that you need emergency surgery. You listen. We should all listen. What’s happening in Minnesota isn’t normal politics. It’s an unchecked executive branch attacking American citizens, the states, and the Constitution itself.

A Dangerous Precedent

The events in Minnesota could set a dangerous precedent for federal-state relations across the country. If the federal government can deploy thousands of armed agents into a state without legal justification, without consulting local authorities, and using methods that violate citizens’ constitutional rights, then no state is safe. The doctrine of “equal sovereignty” of the states—a fundamental constitutional principle—would be rendered meaningless. States would become subjects rather than partners in our federal system.

The implications for civil liberties are also profound. The use of excessive force against peaceful protesters, the arrest of innocent bystanders, racial profiling, and the targeting of sensitive locations such as schools and churches create a climate of fear that is the antithesis of American values. These tactics resemble those of authoritarian regimes more than those of a constitutional democracy. The fact that an American citizen can be shot by a federal agent in their own neighborhood without immediate consequences for the agent in question is extremely troubling.

A Democratic Divide

The events in Minnesota are exacerbating the country’s already deep political divisions. On one side, those who support the Trump administration view the operation as a necessary measure to enforce the law and protect public safety. On the other, those who oppose these methods see them as an attack on the fundamental values of American democracy. This polarization makes it difficult to resolve the conflict and prevents constructive dialogue on issues of immigration and security.

Social media has amplified these divisions, with images and videos showing very different aspects of the situation. On one hand, images of federal agents doing their jobs are presented as evidence of the government’s commitment to enforcing the law. On the other, images of peaceful protests broken up by force, of children in tears being arrested on their way to school, and of American citizens shot dead in their own neighborhoods are presented as evidence of a government out of control. This war of images makes it difficult for the public to distinguish truth from propaganda.

What frightens me is that we are becoming accustomed to the unacceptable. We see images that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago—masked federal agents hunting people down in the streets, children arrested on their way to school, American citizens shot by federal agents—and we are becoming desensitized. We accept this as “the new normal.” But this is not normal. This is not American. And it should never be acceptable. We must wake up before it’s too late. We must say that this is not our America.

The Importance of Judicial Oversight

The federal complaint filed by Attorney Ellison represents a crucial step toward resolving this constitutional crisis. The courts have a vital role to play in determining whether the Trump administration’s actions are constitutional. The system of checks and balances in our democracy depends on the judiciary’s ability to limit the excessive powers of the executive branch. If the courts confirm that Operation “Metro Surge” violates the Constitution, this would hold the administration accountable to its constitutional obligations and protect the rights of American citizens.

The judicial process, though slow, offers hope for a resolution based on the law rather than raw politics. The constitutional arguments put forward in the complaint are sound and deserve serious consideration. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, including the right to criticize the government and to protest peacefully. The Tenth Amendment protects the rights of the states against unwarranted federal interference. The principle of sovereign equality among the states ensures that all states are treated equally by the federal government. These principles are not theoretical abstractions—they are the foundations of our democracy.

The Need for ICE Reform

The events in Minnesota also underscore the urgent need for comprehensive ICE reform. The agency’s aggressive and often illegal tactics have been documented across the country for years. The use of excessive force, racial profiling, and the targeting of sensitive locations are not new—but they have reached a new level of intensity and visibility in Minnesota. Meaningful reform of ICE is necessary to ensure that the agency respects the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens while fulfilling its legitimate mission of enforcing immigration laws.

This reform should include increased training for agents on constitutional rights, stricter accountability mechanisms for agents who violate these rights, and greater oversight by Congress and the courts. Agents who use excessive force or unlawfully detain U.S. citizens must be held accountable for their actions. ICE must also establish clear guidelines for operations in sensitive locations such as schools, churches, and hospitals.

The Need for a National Dialogue

Finally, the events in Minnesota underscore the need for a constructive national dialogue on immigration. Political polarization has made any rational discussion of this complex issue nearly impossible. On one side, those who favor strict enforcement of immigration laws accuse their opponents of supporting “open borders.” On the other, those who favor a more humane approach to immigration accuse their opponents of being racist or xenophobic.

Yet most Americans fall somewhere between these two extremes. They recognize that immigration is a complex issue that requires balanced solutions. They support a sovereign nation’s right to control its borders, but they also believe that the United States should be a country that welcomes immigrants with dignity and respect. They want fair and humane immigration laws, enforced equitably without violating constitutional rights. This moderate consensus exists, but it is drowned out by political extremes.

There is a path forward, but it requires courage and political will. The courts can limit abuses, but only political will can create an immigration system that actually works—a system that respects human dignity while protecting national security; a system that recognizes the contributions of immigrants while enforcing the law fairly. A system that reflects our values as a nation of immigrants. It’s not easy, but it’s necessary. And it’s possible if we have the courage to pursue it.

American Identity Under Scrutiny

The events in Minnesota are not just a local crisis or a temporary political issue—they represent a moment of truth for America. How we respond to this crisis will define who we are as a nation and what values we stand for. Are we a nation that respects the Constitution and the rights of its citizens, or are we willing to abandon these principles in the name of security and control? Are we a nation that treats immigrants with dignity and respect, or are we willing to accept tactics that violate the fundamental rights of all who live in this country?

The images from Minnesota—thousands of people protesting in the cold against an oppressive federal presence, children arrested on their way to school, an American citizen shot dead in her own neighborhood—are tests of our national conscience. We cannot look away from these images without turning our backs on who we claim to be. We must face what is happening head-on and decide if this is the America we want to be.

Hope Despite It All

Yet even in this dark moment, there are reasons for hope. The response of the people of Minnesota—thousands of people of all backgrounds, united against injustice—bears witness to the resilience of the American democratic spirit. The federal complaint filed by Attorney General Ellison represents the courage of institutions that defend the Constitution against abuses of executive power. The testimony of Ty Cobb, a former adviser to the Trump administration, denouncing ICE’s abuses, shows that even those in power can recognize when lines have been crossed.

These acts of courage and solidarity are the glimmers of light that illuminate the darkness. They remind us that despite political divisions and institutional failures, America remains a nation capable of moral greatness. We have weathered more severe crises in our history, and we have always found a way to move toward a more perfect union. The crisis in Minnesota can be such a moment of progress—if we have the courage to confront it.

What is happening in Minnesota breaks my heart, but it also gives me hope. It breaks my heart to see my country acting in a way so contrary to its most fundamental values. But it gives me hope to see thousands of people standing together to defend those values. To see institutions like the courts and district attorneys’ offices upholding the Constitution. To see people from all walks of life united against injustice. This is what America can be at its best—a nation that does not accept the unacceptable, that stands up for the oppressed, and that fights for its ideals even when it’s hard. We are at a moment of truth, but we are also at a moment of opportunity. An opportunity to show the world—and ourselves—who we truly are.