The state of Minnesota is vowing to continue the legal battle after it and twelve cities, including St Paul and Minneapolis, were denied a temporary restraining order that would have shut down Operation Metro Surge.
In her ruling, Judge Kate Menendez said that the state had not proved that Operation Metro Surge had crossed a constitutional line, “and had not met the burden of proof needed” for her to issue a temporary restraining order.
“We fight on, so it’s important for your viewers to know we didn’t get the temporary emergency action we wanted, but that doesn’t stop the case. The case continues on, the lawsuit continues on,” Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem celebrated the ruling, saying, “This is a win for public safety and law and order.”
“I am praying that nobody gets hurt or killed tonight or tomorrow morning, or no 5-year-olds get snatched up again in the next 48 or 72 hours,” Ellison said on Sunday. “I am deeply concerned about that, but I am not going to stop.”
Ellison believes communication between federal and state officials is improving.
After Commander Greg Bovino was replaced, the acting director of ICE, Tom Homan, took over. The attorney general met with Homan in what both parties say was a productive meeting.
“Kristi Noem never called, never wanted to talk; Bovino never called, never wanted to talk, so at least now we are having adult conversations with administration leaders. We didn’t agree on everything, but we did agree on some things,” Ellison said.
So, the legal case will now continue and so will Operation Metro Surge.
You can watch WCCO Sunday Morning with Esme Murphy and Adam Del Rosso every Sunday at 6 a.m. and 10:30 a.m.
Federal judge Kate Menendez denied Minnesota’s motion for a temporary restraining order to halt “Operation Metro Surge” on Saturday. The court documents, filed on Saturday, say that Minnesota and its cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have not met their burden of proof.
The argument to halt operations, in part, stated that the federal operation is “causing harm to the Twin Cities and State themselves, as well as their residents.” Lawyers with the U.S. Department of Justice have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous.”
In the court documents, Menendez cited another recent case where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated the preliminary injunction ruling that restricted the force federal agents can use on peaceful protesters, saying that court case had “much more settled precedent” in that case and that “the Court of Appeals determined that the injunction would cause irreparable harm to the government because it would hamper their efforts to enforce federal law.” Menendez also wrote, “If that injunction went too far, then halting the entire operation certainly would.”
“Because there is evidence supporting both sides’ arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side’s competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction,” the judge said in the ruling.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey released a statement after Menendez’s ruling that stated in part:
“Of course, we’re disappointed. This decision doesn’t change what people here have lived through — fear, disruption, and harm caused by a federal operation that never belonged in Minneapolis in the first place. This operation has not brought public safety. It’s brought the opposite and has detracted from the order we need for a working city. It’s an invasion, and it needs to stop.”
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have sought a temporary restraining order in their lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump administration officials.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took to social media Saturday to laud the ruling, calling it “another HUGE” legal win for the Justice Department on X.
Minnesota’s argument
The state filed the lawsuit claiming the Trump administration has “violated the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” through infringement of police power and unlawful coercion. Minnesota alleges it “has been singled out and targeted by ICE in a way that no other state has experienced.”
In the court filing, Minnesota argues that the operation is not motivated by “a legitimate law-enforcement purpose” but rather serves as a “pretext for leveraging demands and punishing political leaders within the State and Twin Cities who oppose the Trump administration’s immigration policies.”
Court documents also state that the large-scale presence of federal agents has disrupted the healthcare industry, affected local businesses and stopped residents from going to religious services. The state also claims that “federal officers’ use of force and being detained on their way to and from school had had ‘negative impacts on attendance and student focus’” forcing several school districts to temporarily close.
Trump administration’s argument
The Trump administration argues Operation Metro Surge was launched “to address the dangers arising from the presence of illegal aliens in the Twin Cities.” The administration also argues the dangers are exacerbated by Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul’s sanctuary city policies.
The Trump administration also claims that Operation Metro Surge has “strictly been in furtherance of “the enforcement of federal law,” in line with President Trump’s campaign promises.”
Federal judge Kate Menendez denied Minnesota’s motion for a temporary restraining order to halt “Operation Metro Surge” on Saturday. The court documents, filed on Saturday, say that Minnesota and its cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have not met their burden of proof.
The argument to halt operations, in part, stated that the federal operation is “causing harm to the Twin Cities and State themselves, as well as their residents.” Lawyers with the U.S. Department of Justice have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous.”
In the court documents, Menendez cited another recent case where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated the preliminary injunction ruling that restricted the force federal agents can use on peaceful protesters, saying that court case had “much more settled precedent” in that case and that “the Court of Appeals determined that the injunction would cause irreparable harm to the government because it would hamper their efforts to enforce federal law.” Menendez also wrote, “If that injunction went too far, then halting the entire operation certainly would.”
“Because there is evidence supporting both sides’ arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side’s competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction,” the judge said in the ruling.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey released a statement after Menendez’s ruling that stated in part:
“Of course, we’re disappointed. This decision doesn’t change what people here have lived through — fear, disruption, and harm caused by a federal operation that never belonged in Minneapolis in the first place. This operation has not brought public safety. It’s brought the opposite and has detracted from the order we need for a working city. It’s an invasion, and it needs to stop.”
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have sought a temporary restraining order in their lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump administration officials.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took to social media Saturday to laud the ruling, calling it “another HUGE” legal win for the Justice Department on X.
Minnesota’s argument
The state filed the lawsuit claiming the Trump administration has “violated the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” through infringement of police power and unlawful coercion. Minnesota alleges it “has been singled out and targeted by ICE in a way that no other state has experienced.”
In the court filing, Minnesota argues that the operation is not motivated by “a legitimate law-enforcement purpose” but rather serves as a “pretext for leveraging demands and punishing political leaders within the State and Twin Cities who oppose the Trump administration’s immigration policies.”
Court documents also state that the large-scale presence of federal agents has disrupted the healthcare industry, affected local businesses and stopped residents from going to religious services. The state also claims that “federal officers’ use of force and being detained on their way to and from school had had ‘negative impacts on attendance and student focus’” forcing several school districts to temporarily close.
Trump administration’s argument
The Trump administration argues Operation Metro Surge was launched “to address the dangers arising from the presence of illegal aliens in the Twin Cities.” The administration also argues the dangers are exacerbated by Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul’s sanctuary city policies.
The Trump administration also claims that Operation Metro Surge has “strictly been in furtherance of “the enforcement of federal law,” in line with President Trump’s campaign promises.”
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison will testify at a House Oversight Committee hearing on fraud and the “misuse” of federal funds in the state in March, Chairman James Comer, R-Kentucky, said on Friday.
Republicans on the committee launched an investigation into Walz’s handling of a series of multimillion-dollar fraud schemes in Minnesota last December. Members, at the time, asked in letters the governor and Ellison for “documents and communications showing what your administration knew about this fraud and whether you took action to limit or halt the investigation into this widespread fraud.”
“Americans deserve answers about the rampant misuse of taxpayer dollars in Minnesota’s social services programs that occurred on Governor Walz’s and Attorney General Ellison’s watch,” Comer said in a news release on Friday.
The hearing is scheduled for March 4. WCCO has reached out to Walz and Ellison for comment.
Republican Minnesota state Reps. Kristin Robbins, Walter Hudson and Marion Rarick, along with Brendan Ballou, a former prosecutor for the Justice Department who is appearing as the Democrats’ witness, testified in front of the committee earlier this month.
Robbins said, as chair of a fraud prevention committee in the Minnesota House, she’s been “working to uncover the massive fraud under Tim Walz, propose solutions and hold state agencies accountable.”
She also testified that her committee has evidence that, as far back as 2012, money has been sent back to al Shabaab, a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization and al Qaeda affiliate based in Somalia. The Treasury Department said last month that it would investigate whether tax dollars from Minnesota’s public assistance programs made their way to al Shabaab.
Democrats on the committee acknowledged concerns about fraud during the Jan. 7 hearing, but said the response should not punish communities unjustly, while pointing to what they said was hypocrisy among their GOP colleagues in taking fraud allegations seriously.
Walz has defended his handling of the crisis, saying his administration has “spent years cracking down on fraudsters” and has accused President Trump of “politicizing the issue to defund programs that help Minnesotans.”
On Dec. 31, A spokesperson for Walz said in response to the Jan. 7 hearing, without expanding, “We’re always happy to work with Congress, though this committee has a track record of holding circus hearings that have nothing to do with the issue at hand.”
Ellison’s office said on Dec. 31, without evidence, that the attorney general and the state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit have “prosecuted over 300 Medicaid fraud cases and won over $80 million in recoveries and restitution for the people of Minnesota.”
A federal judge said there will be no decision on Monday in Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s bid to end to Operation Metro Surge.
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul are seeking a temporary restraining order in their lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump administration officials, arguing the influx of thousands of immigration agents to the state has caused “tremendous damage.”
Tricia McLaughlin, U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s assistant secretary, previously called the suit “baseless.”
Judge Kate Menendez, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, said at the end of Monday’s hearing she is going to take the time “to do everything I can to get it right” on whatever final decision she makes.
Menendez was just as skeptical of the rationale of the U.S. Department of Justice and Trump administration for the deployment and the number of federal officers deployed as she was the state’s arguments.
She started off by acknowledging the significance of Monday’s hearing and the weeks-long record of court filings in front of her, but said “most of the complexity … rests on the legal questions” of what Minnesota is asking for in the case and not on the actions of the Trump administration.
Judge Kate Menendez during the hearing in Minneapolis federal court on Jan. 26, 2026.
Cedric Hohnstadt
The plaintiffs’ arguments
Lindsey Middlecamp, an attorney with Ellison’s office, said Minnesota should not have to deal with this “unchecked invasion and occupation” another day, and asked Menendez to issue an immediate restraining order. Middlecamp argued that Operation Metro Surge, which she described as the largest federal deployment of law enforcement in U.S. history, has brought an “unprecedented force of masked agents” who are “racially profiling and inflicting violence” in their wake.
Ellison’s team also underlined the “pervasive and systematic retaliation against legal observers,” including the “indiscriminate use” of chemical irritants.
“They are finding any way they can to find and punish those who speak up against this misconduct,” Middlecamp said. “Harms are accruing every day.”
Menendez was skeptical of exactly what harms the state is alleging and under what past precedent case law can give her guidance to make a decision, and what exactly the solution is in this case.
Minnesota Assistant Attorney General Brian Carter then alleged that DHS “designed” plans to force Minnesota to expend its resources.
“The difficulty with the case law on this situation is that this situation is unprecedented in the 250-year history of this country,” Carter said. “We have never had a federal government amass an army of 3,000 to 4,000 masked federal agents and sent them into a state to essentially stir the pot with conduct that is pervasive and includes widespread and illegal violent conduct.”
Menendez replied that while Minnesotans are in “shockingly unusual times,” she’s unsure if she has the leverage to stop it as a whole. She added that the “defining principle” of the argument is something that she is “struggling with here,” adding that the federal government has tremendous power in immigration enforcement.
Carter said he has seen a “crystallization” of efforts, citing Bondi’s “shakedown” letter.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and his legal team during the hearing in Minneapolis federal court on Jan. 26, 2026.
Cedric Hohnstadt
“‘You need to do these three things, and if you do it, we’ll get these officers off your streets,’” Carter said. “It’s a particularly damaging flavor of extortion.”
Carter cited the 10th Amendment in the Bill of Rights, which states the “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
“This administration is not content with the rule of law,” Carter said. “This administration is not content with the courts working this stuff out.”
Carter said instead, the administration is putting “violence on the streets” of Minnesota.
“That has to violate the 10th Amendment,” Carter said.
Menendez said she wants to know the parameters of the ruling if there is one, adding there is “no question” the federal government can enforce immigration laws, but she questioned how she is supposed to be able to delineate between legal response and illegal response by the government.
“I don’t know what the line is,” Menendez said. “Is it the motivation, is it the scope, is it the illegality?”
“That kind of coercion … when Congress legislating that states are required to run background checks, if those violate the 10th Amendment, this has to. It’s beyond debate,” Carter said. “This is so far beyond the pale of legality, this is such an affront on the sovereignty of the state.”
Carter also underlined the unprecedented nature of the Trump administration’s attack on states “based on personal animosity.”
“The president of the United States said, he said, ‘Minnesota, your day of retribution is here.’ That is crazy,” Carter said. “How can that not violate equal sovereignty … If this is the way things go, if this is not stopped, what is going to happen to the next administration?”
Menendez ultimately pushed back on the state’s requests for a temporary restraining order.
“You’re asking me for a TRO. What does it say? What exactly do I do?” Menendez said.
Carter argued that the easiest, most straightforward thing is to end Operation Metro Surge.
“The whole Operation Metro Surge is an illegal means to an illegal ends, so just end it,” Carter said. “End the whole thing, is the appropriate remedy here.”
Menendez replied with a question.
“I can do all that?” she said.
The defense’s arguments
After a brief recess, Menendez asked U.S. Department of Justice attorney Andrew Warden if the explicit goal of Operation Metro Surge was to get Minnesota to change the policies listed out in Bondi’s memo — the contents of which did not sit well with Menendez.
Warden replied that “the goal of the surge is to enforce federal law.” Menendez then pushed again, asking if Minneapolis changed its policies and the state did the same thing, would the surge end?
“I can’t commit to a specific numbers of officers leaving,” Warden said.
Menendez, pushing again, asked: “But it would change? Aside from the fact that policies have been in effect for years, if they changed policies tomorrow, you’d leave?”
“The goal of the surge is to enforce federal law,” Warden said.
Menendez then asked how Bondi’s letter and written statements to the court do not demonstrate that the purpose of the surge is to affect the three changes the U.S. attorney general listed. Warden deflected, adding there was a need for “compensation” to supplement the “vacuum” left by the state and local leaders on immigration enforcement.
“It’s not like you can fix it overnight, let’s say they fix it in a week. If it is true you’re there because those policies had consequences, do you think it’s true that the motivation matters?” Menendez said. “Let’s imagine Bondi said we are here till you change your policies? Does that not violate the anticommandeering principle?”
“If there is a less of a need for federal law enforcement, then our involvement will change,” Warden said, but added it’s “undisputed that federal law enforcement can be here enforcing federal immigration law.”
Menendez then pressed Warden on Mr. Trump’s comments on “retribution.”
“I have not exactly seen that Truth Social recently,” Warden said, referring to posts from the president’s social media platform.
Next, Menendez mentioned Chicago, which had a DHS surge last year, and cited the lower number of federal law enforcement officers who were deployed to a much larger city to deal with potentially a much larger problem. She said there are “vastly more” law enforcement in Minnesota “than was even thought to be necessary in Chicago.”
“Is there a point in which it can no longer be depicted as a rational law enforcement response?” Menendez said.
Warden responded by citing Trump’s Article II powers, and said it would be “difficult to craft a remedy in light of that,” adding that he doesn’t “see how a court can say this amount of officers is the right amount” if requested by DHS.
Menendez said Bondi’s letter “concerns” her in describing the DOJ’s goals, because all three points are already being litigated in federal court in the state.
Brantley Mayers, a U.S. Department of Justice attorney, addresses federal Judge Kate Menendez as Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and his team looks on during the hearing on Jan. 26, 2025, in Minneapolis.
Cedric Hohnstadt
“Is the executive trying to achieve a goal through force that it cannot achieve through courts?” Menendez said.
“No, your honor,” Warden said, adding that “when there’s a vacuum in law enforcement” the federal government has gone in historically. Warden said he “doesn’t see how” operating on one front in Minnesota stops the law enforcement there from enforcing other laws.
Warden and his justice department team finished their arguments by telling Menendez they do not see the grounds for an injunction of any type and that there would be an “administrability problem” with pausing Operation Metro Surge in any respect, adding it would be “very difficult to implement.”
The plaintiffs got the final word before recess on Monday, with Minneapolis city attorney Sarah Lathrop saying relief is needed because it’s “clear that the intense situation on the ground” is not getting better.
“The court in its exercise can say ‘we’re stopping, we’re pausing,’” Lathrop said, adding there’s a chance of proceeding the case over the long term.
“You don’t have to draw the lines now,” Lathrop said.
The plaintiffs asked for Menendez’s order to return the federal law enforcement back to the status quo in the state to Nov. 30, the day before Operation Metro Surge began.
Lathrop said an order needs to come now to “take down the temperature.”
“Not all crises have a fix from a district court injunction,” Menendez said. “There are other things that are supposed to reign in this kind of conduct. It must be that work is being done elsewhere to bring an end to what is described here, not just counting on a single district court writing a single preliminary injunction.”
A federal judge will hear arguments Monday on whether she should at least temporarily halt the immigration crackdown in Minnesota that has led to the fatal shootings of two people by government officers.The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul sued the Department of Homeland Security earlier this month, five days after Renee Good was shot by an Immigration and Customs officer. Saturday’s shooting by a Border Patrol officer of Alex Pretti has only added urgency to the case.Since the original filing, the state and cities have substantially added to their original request. They’re trying to restore the state of affairs that existed before the Trump administration launched Operation Metro Surge on Dec. 1.The hearing is set for Monday morning in federal court in Minneapolis. Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he plans to personally attend.They’re asking that U.S. District Judge Kathleen Menendez order federal law enforcement agencies to reduce the numbers of officers and agents in Minnesota to levels before the surge, while allowing them to continue to enforce immigration laws within a long list of proposed limits.Justice Department attorneys have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous” and said “Minnesota wants a veto over federal law enforcement.” They asked the judge to reject the request or at least stay her order pending an anticipated appeal.Ellison said at a news conference Sunday that he and the cities filed their lawsuit because of “the unprecedented nature of this surge. It is a novel abuse of the Constitution that we’re looking at right now. No one can remember a time when we’ve seen something like this.”It wasn’t clear ahead of the hearing when the judge might rule.The case also has implications for other states that have been or could be targets of intensive federal immigration enforcement operations. Attorneys general from 19 states plus the District of Columbia, led by California, filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota.”If left unchecked, the federal government will no doubt be emboldened to continue its unlawful conduct in Minnesota and to repeat it elsewhere,” the attorneys general wrote.Menendez is the same judge who ruled in a separate case on Jan. 16 that federal officers in Minnesota can’t detain or tear gas peaceful protesters who aren’t obstructing authorities, including people who are following and observing agents.An appeals court temporarily suspended that ruling three days before Saturday’s shooting. But the plaintiffs in that case, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, asked the appeals court late Saturday for an emergency order lifting the stay in light of Pretti’s killing. The Justice Department argued in a reply filed Sunday that the stay should remain in place, calling the injunction unworkable and overly broad.In yet another case, a different federal judge, Eric Tostrud, late Saturday issued an order blocking the Trump administration from “destroying or altering evidence” related to Saturday’s shooting. Ellison and Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty asked for the order to try to preserve evidence collected by federal officials that state authorities have not yet been able to inspect. A hearing in that case is scheduled for Monday afternoon in federal court in St. Paul.“The fact that anyone would ever think that an agent of the federal government might even think about doing such a thing was completely unforeseeable only a few weeks ago,” Ellison told reporters. “But now, this is what we have to do.”
MINNEAPOLIS —
A federal judge will hear arguments Monday on whether she should at least temporarily halt the immigration crackdown in Minnesota that has led to the fatal shootings of two people by government officers.
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul sued the Department of Homeland Security earlier this month, five days after Renee Good was shot by an Immigration and Customs officer. Saturday’s shooting by a Border Patrol officer of Alex Pretti has only added urgency to the case.
Since the original filing, the state and cities have substantially added to their original request. They’re trying to restore the state of affairs that existed before the Trump administration launched Operation Metro Surge on Dec. 1.
The hearing is set for Monday morning in federal court in Minneapolis. Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he plans to personally attend.
They’re asking that U.S. District Judge Kathleen Menendez order federal law enforcement agencies to reduce the numbers of officers and agents in Minnesota to levels before the surge, while allowing them to continue to enforce immigration laws within a long list of proposed limits.
Justice Department attorneys have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous” and said “Minnesota wants a veto over federal law enforcement.” They asked the judge to reject the request or at least stay her order pending an anticipated appeal.
Ellison said at a news conference Sunday that he and the cities filed their lawsuit because of “the unprecedented nature of this surge. It is a novel abuse of the Constitution that we’re looking at right now. No one can remember a time when we’ve seen something like this.”
It wasn’t clear ahead of the hearing when the judge might rule.
The case also has implications for other states that have been or could be targets of intensive federal immigration enforcement operations. Attorneys general from 19 states plus the District of Columbia, led by California, filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota.
“If left unchecked, the federal government will no doubt be emboldened to continue its unlawful conduct in Minnesota and to repeat it elsewhere,” the attorneys general wrote.
Menendez is the same judge who ruled in a separate case on Jan. 16 that federal officers in Minnesota can’t detain or tear gas peaceful protesters who aren’t obstructing authorities, including people who are following and observing agents.
An appeals court temporarily suspended that ruling three days before Saturday’s shooting. But the plaintiffs in that case, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, asked the appeals court late Saturday for an emergency order lifting the stay in light of Pretti’s killing. The Justice Department argued in a reply filed Sunday that the stay should remain in place, calling the injunction unworkable and overly broad.
In yet another case, a different federal judge, Eric Tostrud, late Saturday issued an order blocking the Trump administration from “destroying or altering evidence” related to Saturday’s shooting. Ellison and Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty asked for the order to try to preserve evidence collected by federal officials that state authorities have not yet been able to inspect. A hearing in that case is scheduled for Monday afternoon in federal court in St. Paul.
“The fact that anyone would ever think that an agent of the federal government might even think about doing such a thing was completely unforeseeable only a few weeks ago,” Ellison told reporters. “But now, this is what we have to do.”
The state of Minnesota, along with the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, are suing Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other federal officials in an effort to stop the surge of federal law enforcement officials coming into the state.
State officials said the lawsuit, filed on Monday, is asking the federal court to “end the unprecedented surge of DHS agents into the state and declare it unconstitutional and unlawful.”
The lawsuit, according to officials, also asks the court for a temporary restraining order, citing the immediate harm the state and cities are facing.
“We allege that the surge, reckless impact on our schools, on our local law enforcement, is a violation of the 10th Amendment and the sovereign laws and powers of the Constitution,” Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said while discussing the lawsuit on Monday afternoon.
The Trump administration initiated a massive deployment of approximately 2,000 federal agents to the Twin Cities amid a widening fraud scandal on Jan. 5. The influx involves agents from ICE and Homeland Security Investigations overseeing a 30-day operation. Agents from DHS are expected to probe alleged cases of fraud.
Homeland Security Investigations on Dec. 29 conducted a “massive investigation on child care and other rampant fraud” in the Twin Cities, according to Noem. Two DHS officials told CBS News that federal agents were expected to inspect over 30 sites. Many of their targets were day care centers referenced in a viral video posted by conservative YouTuber Nick Shirley.
CBS News conducted its own analysis of nearly 12 day care centers mentioned by Shirley: all but two have active licenses, according to state records, and all active locations were visited by state regulators within the last six months.
Homeland Security’s Operation Metro Surge, which has targeted Somali immigrants in Minnesota, started at the beginning of December. The operation has led to more than 2,000 arrests, according to DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. Federal agents have also been detaining severalprotesters and observers.
Illinois on Monday filed a lawsuit against DHS over what state officials called “unlawful and dangerous tactics” used by Customs and Border Protection and ICE agents in the state.
The court document, which also names other federal officials, alleges federal agents arrested people without warrants or probable cause and “implemented an illegal policy of deploying Border Patrol” to Chicago and other parts of Illinois.
“Minnesota is going to be the protocols, procedures and investigative techniques and collaboration. Minnesota is going to be the genesis for a national rollout,” Bessent said. “Treasury will deploy all tools to bring an end to this egregious, unchecked fraud and hold perpetrators to account.”
According to Bessent, the IRS task force will specifically probe financial institutions that facilitate wire transfers, as evidence from the Feeding Our Future trial showed some suspects sent money to banks in Kenya and China. Bessent added that four Twin Cities-based businesses are under investigation, but did not share their names. The department is also requiring all financial institutions in Hennepin and Ramsey counties to report any overseas transfer of $3,000 or more.
“Think of the absurdity of money being wired from Minnesota by these individuals that could have come from government programs or from excess benefits,” Bessent added. “This should not be wired out of the country and we are going to be cracking down on that.”
Bessent’s visit also comes on the heels of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s announcement that a team of prosecutors is headed to Minnesota “to reinforce our U.S. Attorney’s Office and put perpetrators of this widespread fraud behind bars.”
“We will deliver severe consequences in Minnesota and stand ready to deploy to any other state where similar fraud schemes are robbing American taxpayers,” Bondi said.
Reached for comment, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s office said it “categorically rejects the premise that the ‘underlying reason’ Trump has ordered the outsized presence of ICE in Minnesota is because of fraud,” and said “Ellison does have extensive experience in successfully fighting fraud.”
“What Donald Trump knows about fraud isn’t fighting it, it’s actually letting fraudsters out of prison,” Ellison’s office added.
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office says Menards, the Wisconsin-based home improvement retailer, has reached a $4.25 million settlement with several states to “resolve claims” of deceptive marketing practices in its popular “11% Rebate Program” and pandemic-era price gouging.
Attorney General Keith Ellison said Minnesota will receive $632,167 of the settlement filed on Wednesday in Ramsey County with parent company Menard Inc., headquartered in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. The company’s home state was also involved in the suit, along with Arizona, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio and South Dakota.
According to court documents, the attorneys general alleged Menards deceived customers with its promise of saving “big money” through the rebate program because there is actually no real point-of-purchase discount. Instead, customers must fill out a rebate form to eventually receive in-store credit on subsequent purchases.
The suit also alleged the company obscured the fact that Rebates International — the name on the address of where rebate forms are sent — is part of Menard Inc. and not a separate company.
“An ad that says ‘11% OFF EVERYTHING’ clearly implies that you can buy goods at an 11% discount, not that you can participate in a limited rebate program or get in-store credit for future purchases,” Ellison said in a news release. “Today’s settlement holds Menards accountable for how they advertised their rebate program in the past and ensures that program will be more honest in the future.”
The suit also alleged Menard Inc. “engaged in price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic by raising prices on items such as rubbing alcohol, garbage bags, dish soap, and neoprene gloves.”
Ellison said Menard Inc. agreed to make several “advertising and sales practices” changes as part of the settlement, including “clearly and conspicuously disclosing material limitations of the rebate program,” making it clear Rebates International and Menards are one and the same and abstaining from price gouging “during a period of abnormal economic disruption.”
According to Forbes, Menards is the third-largest home improvement chain in the U.S., with Home Depot and Lowe’s in the top two spots. The company has 300-plus stores in 15 states, with most in the Midwest.
Millions of Hyundai and Kia owners can get free repairs under a settlement announced Tuesday by Minnesota’s attorney general, who led an effort by dozens of states that argued the vehicles weren’t equipped with proper anti-theft technology, leaving them vulnerable to thefts.
The settlement comes after a rash of Hyundai and Kia thefts prompted nearly two dozen state attorneys general in 2023 to demand the automakers take action.
In 2023, the Highway Loss Data Institute, a unit of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, found that Hyundai and Kia vehicles without “engine immobilizers,” an anti-theft device that were standard on other new cars at the time, had a vehicle theft claim rate of 2.18 per 1,000 insured vehicle years. The rest of the industry combined had a rate of 1.21.
Under the nationwide settlement, the companies will offer a free repair to all eligible vehicles at a cost that could top $500 million, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said. Hyundai and Kia must also outfit all future vehicles sold in the U.S. with engine immobilizers, as well as pay up to $4.5 million of restitution to people whose vehicles were damaged by thieves.
The settlement was reached by 35 states, including California, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania. The vehicles eligible for fixes date as far back as 2011 and as recently as 2022. About 9 million eligible vehicles were sold nationwide.
TikTok videos of thefts
Beginning in 2021, thefts of Hyundai and Kia vehicles soared in part because videos posted to TikTok and other social media demonstrated how someone could steal a car with just a screwdriver and a USB cable.
Minneapolis reported an 836% increase in Hyundai and Kia thefts from 2021 to 2022, and Ellison announced an investigation into the automakers in early 2023.
Ellison said the two companies installed engine immobilizers on cars sold in Mexico and Canada, but not widely in the U.S., leading to car thefts, crimes and crashes that injured and even killed people, including teenagers.
“This crisis that we’re talking about today started in a boardroom, traveled through the Internet and ended up in tragic results when somebody stole those cars,” Ellison said at a news conference.
He was joined by Twin Cities officials, a woman whose mother was killed when a stolen Kia crashed into her parents’ vehicle and a man whose car was stolen nine times — as recently as Monday night, and including seven times after a previous software fix.
Under the settlement, Hyundai and Kia will install a zinc sleeve to stop would-be thieves from cracking open a vehicle’s ignition cylinder and starting the car.
Eligible customers will have one year from the date of the companies’ notice to get the repair at an authorized dealership. The repairs are expected to be available from early 2026 through early 2027.
In a statement sent to CBS News, Kia said the agreement is the latest step it has taken to help its customers and prevent theft.
“These include the development and introduction of a free software security upgrade that has been found to significantly reduce theft rates, the distribution of hundreds of thousands of steering wheel locks to our customers at no cost, and the rollout of a zinc-sleeve hardware modification that combats this social media-inspired theft method by reinforcing the ignition cylinder body and preventing its removal through the technique that was made popular online,” the automaker said.
Hyundai didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Attorney General Keith Ellison is joining 20 other states, plus Washington, D.C., in suing the USDA over guidance regarding SNAP benefits.
“Here we are on the eve of this important American holiday,” said Ellison during a press conference on Wednesday. “We’re fighting to keep food on the table of people who are in our country lawfully and who are entitled to these benefits.”
Ellison claims guidance issued by the USDA on Oct. 31 wrongfully denies food assistance to some legal immigrants, including permanent residents admitted as refugees or given asylum.
The USDA issued that guidance in light of changes made to SNAP eligibility by the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’. That new law limits eligibility for some non-citizens.
Though the lawsuit filed claims USDA guidance “goes beyond the Act, arbitrarily excluding from SNAP many lawful permanent residents who remain eligible.”
“President Trump was elected with a resounding mandate to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government—which includes ensuring that illegal aliens are not receiving benefits intended for American citizens,” said Anna Kelly, a White House Deputy Press Secretary in an email. “Democrats continue to fight for illegals, but the President will always fight to strengthen important programs for American families who rely on them.”
Ellison claims this guidance could expose states to costly penalties for not complying. He also asserts the government did not give states the allotted 120 days to put this guidance into practice. The lawsuit asks for a stay and to block the rules from taking effect.
“The law is clear is refugees and other lawful legal immigrants become eligible for SNAP once they obtain their green card and meet other program requirements. If Trump doesn’t like the law. he’s welcome to try and change it through the normal, usual legal means,” Ellison said.
WCCO News reached out to the USDA and a spokesperson said the agency will not comment on pending litigation.
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office wants answers from a hauling and moving company following a WCCO investigation.
In August, a family said they paid the College Hunks Hauling Junk Shoreview location to have their items donated. Instead, the truck load full of furniture, toys and gently used clothing ended up at the dump. Now the State Attorney General’s Office is looking into alleged deception and misrepresentation in its business practices.
“What they do is they give their customers the impression that if you let us take your stuff away, it’s not just going to end up in a landfill. Well, that did not hold up,” Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said.
The family says they hired the Shoreview franchise of College Hunks Hauling Junk because of the promise on the website to donate or recycle 70% of what’s picked up.
“If you look at their website, they pride themselves in repurposing, recycling or giving things a second life before they take anything to the dump,” the family said.
Soon after the pickup, they started to regret donating some sentimental items. By then, they learned it was too late.
“And that’s when he told me it was all gone. He said it’s all at the dump,” the family said.
The disposal of their carefully saved items was devastating. They hoped it would be donated to one of the partners advertised on the website. Goodwill and Habitat for Humanity ReStore told WCCO they don’t have a partnership with the company.
“I’ll say to any hauler, anybody who holds themselves out this way, that make sure that your representations are demonstrable and provable. If not, you could be violating Minnesota laws as it relates to advertising, as it relates to consumer protection,” Ellison said.
In August, College Hunks Shoreview franchise owner Ryan Spille responded to claims that the items meant for donation were junked.
“If our guys are, like, actually dumping stuff that’s in good condition. I mean, that, like, immediately horrifies me. I’m like, ‘No, that can’t happen,’” Spille told WCCO in August.
A response he sent to the attorney general’s office days later contradicts that, saying in part, “We did not agree to provide a donation pick-up service… Our business is a junk hauling service, as our name indicates. Customers hire us to remove unwanted items from their homes. What happens to those items afterward — whether donated, recycled, or disposed of — is at our discretion.”
“There’s a three-letter word associated saying one thing and then saying another. It starts with an ‘L,’ and it does not bode well for the person who does that,” Ellison said.
Ellison says his office takes consumer protection seriously — and so should businesses.
“When you say 70% is donated or recycled, you’re going to have to show that that’s true. And so look, we’re investigating this matter. We’re going to get to the bottom of what happened. If we find there’s substantial evidence of violation, there’ll be accountability,” Ellison said.
WCCO reached out to College Hunks Shoreview for comment and has not heard back.
“We’re very encouraged that the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office has opened an investigation into College Hunk’s practices,” the family told WCCO in a statement. “This investigation isn’t just about our family; it’s about protecting consumers across Minnesota and making sure people can trust what they’re being told. Families choose College Hunks and pay a premium because they believe they’re doing something good for the community and the environment. If that trust is being broken, it’s important that regulators step in. We appreciate WCCO’s role in bringing attention to this issue, and we hope others who’ve had similar experiences – or suspect their donations were dumped – will come forward so the Attorney General’s Office has a complete picture of what’s happening.”
If you think something similar has happened to you, the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office wants to hear from you. You can call 651-296-3353 or fill out a complaint online.
Court documents show the suit was dismissed late last month. It was originally filed in November of last year by the Women’s Life Care Center, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates and several women who have had abortions.
The suit argued that the state’s abortion laws terminate parental rights without due process. Women are not being informed about their rights when it comes to the procedure, the lawsuit alleged, resulting in thousands of “involuntary” abortions a year.
According to the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, the court said the plaintiffs did not identify which specific laws they were challenging, despite the court repeatedly asking. The court ultimately dismissed the suit because “the crisis pregnancy centers and their owners have suffered no concrete injury as a result of Minnesota’s choice not to impose the stringent abortion regulations the centers prefer.”
Attorney General Keith Ellison was among the defendants named in the suit, along with Gov. Tim Walz, local Planned Parenthood chapters and others.
“This latest attack on abortion access in Minnesota is a reminder that anti-choice interest groups are constantly seeking new ways to ban abortion or make reproductive healthcare services harder to obtain,” Ellison said after the suit’s dismissal. “I am pleased to have defeated this latest attack on abortion in Minnesota, and I will do everything in my power to defend Minnesotans’ right to reproductive healthcare.”
Attorney General Keith Ellison on Tuesday announced a lawsuit against TikTok, alleging the video and social media giant is violating the state’s laws and “preying on Minnesota’s young people” through intentionally manipulative and deceptive practices.
“This stuff is digital nicotine,” Ellison said at a morning news conference. “Just like big tobacco designs its products to addict them, TikTok is working to create TikTok addicts, and the worst part is it’s working. TikTok is profiting, making big money and our kids are paying a heavy price.”
In addition to the allegations concerning the app’s addictiveness, Ellison’s lawsuit addresses the monetary transactions that occur within the app, which he said violate Minnesota law.
“We’re not trying to shut them down, but we are insisting that they clean up their act,” Ellison said.
A spokesperson for TikTok said that “the lawsuit is based on misleading and inaccurate claims that fail to recognize the robust safety measures TikTok has voluntarily implemented to support the well-being of our community.”
The attorney general highlighted specific features of the app, including its “infinite scroll,” push notifications and virtual filters, which he said “can cause users to — especially children, by the way — to compulsively and excessively use the app, such that they are mentally, physically and financially injured.”
Ellison was joined at the news conference by Sean Padden, a middle school health teacher in the Twin Cities who said he’s seen firsthand how damaging TikTok can be to young people.
“I support any regulation or litigation that will force the platform to become less addictive and less damaging to my students and other students throughout the state of Minnesota,” Padden said.
Ellison also alleged the company knowingly exposes children to “grooming” and “inappropriate content.”
“When you combine livestreaming with virtual currency, you get a strip club,” he said. “That’s what TikTok built.”
The lawsuit was filed in state court Tuesday morning, Ellison said. He added that Minnesota families impacted by TikTok can file a complaint on his office’s website, and he is actively looking for more witnesses for the lawsuit.
“My bottom line is that Minnesota will protect our kids,” Ellison said.
Ellison wants the company to pay $25,000 per violation of the state’s consumer protection laws.
In the frantic last weeks of the campaign, both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are doing everything they can to get an edge.
One development that has Democrats concerned and Republicans thrilled is Trump’s relative strength with minority voters.
In 2020, President Biden got 90% of the Black vote while Trump received only 9%.
But in 2024, polls show Harris is not doing as well and Trump has made gains. Harris has 78% of the Black vote while Trump has 15% — an advantage of 63%.
The bottom line is that Harris still has a huge edge among Black voters, but in an election that is expected to be razor close, the difference is significant.
If you break it down by gender, you can see a big source of the divide — 70% of Black men support Harris while 83% of Black women do. The numbers have both sides scrambling.
“As a person who the polls don’t always capture well, I can tell you that I am not sure those numbers are right, but let’s just act like they are,” Ellison said. “It means we have a lot of work to do. It means we have to help voters understand that Donald Trump has been frankly hostile to Black people for a long time.”
On the Republican side, Minnesota Republican National Committee Member AK Kamara says Trump is gaining momentum.
“From my perspective, this is a trend that is continuing nationally,” Kamara said. “I think there are a lot of Black men who see a hero in Donald Trump, a guy that is going to stand up for what he actually believes in.”
Last week, Harris countered by offering up what she calls her “Opportunity Agenda for Black Men.” The policies include a plan to provide as many as 1 million fully forgivable loans of up to $20,000 for Black entrepreneurs.
In these final weeks, Trump is focusing especially hard on younger Black men who polls show are especially receptive to him.
You can watch WCCO Sunday Morning with Esme Murphy and Adam Del Rosso every Sunday at 6 a.m. and 10:30 a.m.
Esme Murphy, a reporter and Sunday morning anchor for WCCO-TV, has been a member of the WCCO-TV staff since December 1990. She is also a weekend talk show host on WCCO Radio. Born and raised in New York City, Esme ventured into reporting after graduating from Harvard University.
The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a 2023 state law that restores voting rights for felons once they have completed their prison sentences.
The new law was popular with Democrats in the state, including Gov. Tim Walz, who signed it and who is Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate in the presidential race. The timing of the decision is important because early voting for next week’s primary election is already underway. Voting for the Nov. 5 general election begins Sept. 20.
The court rejected a challenge from the conservative Minnesota Voters Alliance. A lower court judge had previously thrown out the group’s lawsuit after deciding it lacked the legal standing to sue and failed to prove that the Legislature overstepped its authority when it voted to expand voting rights for people who were formerly incarcerated for a felony. The high court agreed.
Before the new law, felons had to complete their probation before they could regain their eligibility to vote. An estimated 55,000 people with felony records gained the right to vote as a result.
Minnesota Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison had been pushing for the change since he was in the Legislature.
“Democracy is not guaranteed — it is earned by protecting and expanding it,” Ellison said in a statement. “I’m proud restore the vote is definitively the law of the land today more than 20 years after I first proposed it as a state legislator. I encourage all Minnesotans who are eligible to vote to do so and to take full part in our democracy.”
Minnesota was among more than a dozen states that considered restoring voting rights for felons in recent years. Advocates for the change argued that disenfranchising them disproportionately affects people of color because of biases in the legal system. An estimated 55,000 Minnesota residents regained the right to vote because of the change.
Nebraska officials went the other way and decided last month that residents with felony convictions could still be denied voting rights despite a law passed this year to immediately restore the voting rights of people who have finished serving their felony convictions. That decision by Nebraska’s attorney general and secretary of state, both of whom are Republicans, has been challenged in a lawsuit.
MINNEAPOLIS — The Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association on Friday sent a letter to Gov. Tim Walz requesting that the attorney general take over the case of a state trooper who killed a man during a traffic stop in Minneapolis last summer.
Ryan Londregan shot and killed Ricky Cobb II in the early hours of July 31 on Interstate 94 near Lowry Avenue in Minneapolis. Londregan pulled Cobb over for not having his tail light on, according to the Department of Public Safety.
Court filings from Londregan’s lawyers say Noble told the prosecutors the use of force was reasonable because Londregan believed his fellow trooper’s life was in danger. However, Moriarty’s office argued that Noble’s analysis was preliminary, and he didn’t reach any legal conclusion.
A spokesperson for Moriarty’s office on Monday said in part, “The defense has selectively quoted a partial sentence of a lengthy document…[that] excludes critical facts where the expert acknowledged information he would need to fully analyze the case.”
The MPPOA, in a letter to Walz, said Moriarty’s office decided to “manufacture a basis, no matter how flimsy, to bring the charges they intended to bring from the very start” and sought to “minimize the chance that Noble’s analysis could be used against them.”
“The law enforcement community is united in outrage over this ongoing abuse,” the letter goes on to say.
The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office responded with a statement which reads:
We are disappointed but not surprised to see MPPOA’s request that the Governor give special treatment to this case and, for just the second time in the history of the state, remove a case from our jurisdiction. We will not talk about the facts of this case. That’s for the courtroom.
MPPOA is right about one thing – there is a crisis in confidence, but it is not because of attempts at accountability. It is because of well-documented and horrific instances where some officers abused their power and used unauthorized force. These abuses have fallen disproportionately upon the shoulders of black and brown Minnesotans. It is unfortunate to see MPPOA fail to acknowledge this history and fail to try to repair it.
The governor’s office said they received and are reviewing the letter. “The Governor takes this matter seriously,” a spokesperson said.
In a critical victory for progressives, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D) won a second term as the state’s top law enforcement official on Tuesday, beating back an energetic Republican challenger who accused him of responding inadequately to an uptick in crime.
The outcome solidifies Ellison’s place in the national political firmament after his prosecution of the Minneapolis police officers who killed George Floyd, an unarmed Black man, on May 25, 2020, made him a household name. It also preserves the Democratic Party’s control of the office of Minnesota’s attorney general, which has continued uninterrupted since 1971.
Ellison, one of the highest-ranking Muslim elected officials in the country and one of Minnesota’s first Black statewide elected officials, defeated Republican Jim Schultz, an in-house attorney for a Minneapolis hedge fund.
“This election was tough. Millions of dollars were spent to sow division, hate, and fear,” Ellison said in a Wednesday morning statement touting his victory. “And we overcame it: we were positive, and Minnesotans responded.”
He thanked the voters and his staff, as well as Democratic U.S. Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith and other elected officials who endorsed him.
“I promise to continue helping you afford your lives and live with dignity, safety, and respect every day,” he said.
Ellison won over voters by touting his work protecting Minnesota consumers from COVID-19 pandemic price gougers, slumlords, bad employers, negligent gun sellers and Big Pharma. When it came to the pharmaceutical industry, he was proud of his work advocating for a state law capping out-of-pocket insulin costs and defending that law in court.
“This entire fight is one of the many versus the money,” he said at a Nov. 1 news conference about his work on the insulin law. “That is the challenge: Will we be able to afford our lives?”
He also argued that Schultz, who is personally opposed to abortion rights, could not be trusted to faithfully uphold Minnesota laws protecting abortion rights — notwithstanding Schultz’s assurances to the contrary.
“The stakes [of this race] are whether or not women can count on safe, legal abortion into the future,” Ellison told HuffPost.
Schultz had accused Ellison of supporting an effort to “defund” Minneapolis’s police force, because Ellison had spoken up in favor of a failed 2021 referendum that would have transformed policing in the city.
The referendum, Question 2, had proposed transforming the city’s police force into a more holistic “public safety” department with a public health approach to preventing crime. The ballot measure included language eliminating minimum funding requirements for the city police force and empowering the City Council to play a greater role in managing what would be a new department of public safety. And the camp of people advocating for Question 2 was closely associated with proponents of reducing police funding or even abolishing the police.
But Ellison pointed to his record of supporting full funding of police departments, regardless of what other referendum supporters had wanted. And he noted that in Minnesota, the state attorney general does not prosecute criminal cases unless a county asks them to step in.
“I’ve asked for literally millions of dollars over the course of four years of my term so that we can put violent criminals in prison when counties call on us to do it,” Ellison declared in a televised debate with Schultz in late October.
Instead, Ellison put Schultz on the defensive about how he would finance his proposed increase in resources for the criminal division of the attorney general’s office.
“Who’s going to do the opioid cases? Who’s going to do the landlord-tenant cases? Who’s going to do the wage theft cases? Who’s going to do just basic fraud cases?” Ellison told HuffPost. “He’s talking about changing the attorney general’s office in a way that it never has existed.”
There’s no question that Ellison suffered from the perception, in some voters’ eyes, that he is too left wing on policing and crime.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) won reelection against his Republican challenger by more than 7 percentage points.
At least one lifelong Democrat told HuffPost he was so turned off by Ellison’s association with the left wing of the Democratic Party that he voted for Schultz.
“We have to find a happy medium” between the extreme poles of the police policy debate, said Jesse Bissen, a graduate student who lives in North Minneapolis. “[Ellison] seems to be hiding his support for ‘defund the police.’”
Bissen had never voted for a Republican before and cast his ballot for Democrats on the remainder of the ticket.
But enough other Minnesota Democrats had different concerns when deciding for whom to vote.
“I prefer someone with some experience,” said Chris Fogelsonger, a writer from Wayzata, echoing Ellison’s criticism of Schultz’s qualifications. “And Schultz has apparently never tried a case in court.”
Allie Rose, a finance manager for a property management company who lives in Woodbury, said protecting abortion rights was a priority for her.
“I voted Democratic almost all the way down the ticket just because I’m trying to save my options for my bodily functions,” Rose said.
Rose also appreciates that Ellison was the first Muslim elected to Congress in 2006. (Ellison is one of the highest-ranking Muslim elected officials in the country and one of the only Black people to win statewide elected office in Minnesota history.)
“It’s important for inclusion for all people to be represented in the Congress at some point,” she said.
Another election result in metropolitan Minneapolis suggests that residents of the Twin Cities area may no longer be as motivated to punish the progressive Democrats whom they associate with efforts to “defund” the police.
In the race for Hennepin County attorney, Mary Moriarty, a former public defender backed by Ellison and other progressives, defeated the more moderate retired state Judge Martha Holton Dimick, by a wide margin. Moriarty is now due to take over criminal prosecutions in a county of nearly 1.3 million people that is home to the city of Minneapolis.
