The state of Minnesota has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration seeking access to evidence that state officials say federal authorities withheld after three shootings by Department of Homeland Security agents during a major immigration enforcement operation in the Twin Cities earlier this year.
Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the lawsuit centers on the deaths of Minneapolis residents Renee Good and Alex Pretti, as well as the shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, who survived after being shot in the leg by a federal agent. Minnesota officials say the federal government’s refusal to share evidence has prevented the state from independently investigating whether criminal laws were violated during the incidents.
According to the complaint, Minnesota investigators arrived at the scenes of the shootings involving Good and Sosa-Celis and were initially told federal officials would cooperate with local authorities. The lawsuit states that federal agents said they “would work with Minnesota authorities and share relevant information,” but later reversed course.
“Instead of sharing information, federal authorities took exclusive possession of evidence that had been collected, and they denied Minnesota investigators access to key information,” the lawsuit states.
The state argues that federal officials not only withheld information but also actively prevented investigators from carrying out their duties in the case involving Alex Pretti. According to the filing, responding investigators were blocked from initiating their own inquiry at the scene.
“That physical obstruction persisted even after state officials obtained a judicial warrant authorizing access to the scene,” the lawsuit states. “As with the previous two shootings, federal authorities took exclusive control of evidence and refused state and local authorities access to even the most basic information related to the incident — such as the identities of the involved officers.”
Minnesota officials assert that the refusal to provide evidence was not limited to a single incident but reflects a broader policy governing use-of-force investigations connected to the immigration enforcement campaign known as Operation Metro Surge.
“The administration’s refusal to share evidence here did not arise from any case-specific investigative need,” the lawsuit notes. “Instead, the breakdown in cooperation followed intervention by senior federal officials who directed that evidence would not be shared with Minnesota authorities, reflecting a broader policy or practice not to share evidence with Minnesota in Operation Metro Surge use-of-force investigations.”
Operation Metro Surge involved the deployment of thousands of federal officers to Minneapolis and St. Paul as part of a large-scale immigration enforcement effort aligned with President Donald Trump’s national deportation agenda. Minnesota authorities say the operation resulted in widespread fear among residents and triggered a surge in legal challenges related to detentions carried out during the raids.
According to the lawsuit, “federal agents also carried out illegal stops, sweeps, arrests, and dangerous raids in sensitive public spaces.”
“The Surge created widespread fear among Minnesota residents, both citizens and noncitizens. It caused hundreds of millions of dollars in economic harm. And it flooded Minnesota’s federal courts with lawsuits challenging the unlawful detentions that resulted from the operation,” the complaint states.
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said state officials are seeking access to evidence to ensure transparency and accountability in the investigations.
“We are prepared to fight for transparency and accountability that the federal government is desperate to avoid,” Moriarty told reporters.
Moriarty also emphasized that investigations are necessary whenever law enforcement uses deadly force.
“There has to be an investigation any time a federal agent or a state agent takes the life of a person in our community,” Moriarty said.
Minnesota officials argue that federal authorities are improperly preventing the state from investigating potential violations of criminal law that occurred within its jurisdiction. The lawsuit asserts that longstanding principles governing cooperation between state and federal law enforcement do not permit federal agencies to shield officers from scrutiny.
“Principles of federalism do not permit the federal government to withhold investigative evidence for the purpose of shielding law enforcement officers from scrutiny where a State is investigating serious potential violations of its criminal laws, targeting its citizens, within its borders,” the lawsuit states.
The legal dispute comes amid broader questions about the conduct of federal officers during the immigration crackdown. Minnesota officials say they have received more than 1,000 public tips related to the shootings involving Good and Pretti through an online reporting portal. A second portal has also been created to collect additional evidence related to enforcement actions carried out during the operation.
The lawsuit also highlights the case of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, who survived after being shot in the right thigh by a federal agent in January. Federal prosecutors initially accused Sosa-Celis and another individual of assaulting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer using household tools. Those charges were later dropped, and authorities opened a criminal investigation into whether officers involved in the shooting provided false testimony under oath.
Federal officials have defended their handling of the investigations, arguing that federal agencies have authority to conduct internal reviews of incidents involving federal officers. The Justice Department has opened a federal civil rights investigation into Pretti’s killing but determined that a similar federal probe was not warranted in the death of Renee Good.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the Civil Rights Division does not investigate every law enforcement shooting and that there must be facts that “warrant an investigation.”
Minnesota officials say their efforts to conduct independent investigations are necessary due to concerns about the federal government’s ability to objectively review actions carried out by its own agents.
Moriarty said the federal government “has adopted a policy of categorically withholding evidence,” describing the practice as unprecedented.
Public opinion polling conducted following the shootings indicates significant skepticism about federal agencies investigating use-of-force incidents without independent oversight. A CNN/SSRS poll conducted in January found that 62 percent of respondents said they would trust the findings of a federal-only investigation into Good’s killing “some” amount or “not at all.” A Quinnipiac University poll found that 80 percent of respondents supported an independent investigation into Pretti’s killing.
Minnesota’s lawsuit seeks a court order requiring federal agencies to release the evidence requested by state investigators. Officials argue that access to the materials is necessary to determine whether criminal charges should be pursued and to ensure that investigations are conducted in accordance with state law.
The case reflects an escalating legal conflict between state officials and the Trump administration over the scope of federal authority in immigration enforcement operations and the extent to which federal agencies must cooperate with local investigators when use-of-force incidents occur within state borders.
“Principles of federalism do not permit the federal government to withhold investigative evidence for the purpose of shielding law enforcement officers from scrutiny where a State is investigating serious potential violations of its criminal laws, targeting its citizens, within its borders,” the lawsuit states.
COMMENTS