Summary of Minneapolis vs. ICE

Overview of Today Explained: Minneapolis vs. ICE

This episode (Today Explained Saturday, Vox) is an interview between host Ested/Estet Herndon and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison about the recent federal ICE deployment to Minneapolis, the fatal shooting of a protester (named in the transcript as Renee Good), the federal response and investigations, and broader political and legal implications — including the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, questions about local cooperation with ICE, and how Democrats should respond.

Key takeaways

• Ellison condemns rapid, partisan federal statements that blamed the victim and justified ICE actions before investigations were complete, calling them "deeply callous" and indicative of "new territory."
• The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division has reportedly declined to open a use-of-force investigation; several assistant U.S. attorneys resigned over the handling of the case.
• State and local officials (including Ellison’s office) have been denied access to some FBI investigative materials (evidence such as bullet casings and the vehicle), which Ellison says is unjust and departs from usual joint-investigation practice.
• Ellison’s legal challenge targets ICE’s conduct in Minnesota, not the existence of the agency. He stresses ICE must follow the Constitution, federal statutes (e.g., APA), and respect state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment.
• On protest activity: peaceful, disruptive protest (e.g., whistles, criticism) is generally First Amendment protected; physically blocking law enforcement can cross into unlawful obstruction. Ellison emphasizes the legal distinction matters and that most protesters have not been obstructing.
• Ellison says Minnesota’s policy is a separation ordinance (not a “sanctuary city” ban on ICE), meaning local authorities won’t act as ICE’s deputies or hold people beyond lawful detention periods — doing so could create liability.
• If the president invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty troops to Minnesota, Ellison says the state would challenge that in court. The Insurrection Act does not allow suspension of elections but would permit federal troops on the streets and requires a showing that local authorities are overwhelmed — which Ellison disputes.
• On “defund the police” and “abolish ICE” rhetoric: Ellison distinguishes activist slogans from official Democratic policy, acknowledges Democrats could have more clearly articulated an affirmative vision for criminal-justice reform, and says he has not encountered mass calls from voters to abolish ICE.
• Ellison frames the federal mobilization as political and racially charged (targeting Somali communities), arguing that the Trump administration’s deployment — armed personnel rather than fraud investigators — suggests motives other than fraud enforcement.
• Recommended responses: support local investigations (Hennepin County), communicate facts publicly, encourage disciplined protest, and mobilize voters.

Topics discussed

The killing of the protester and federal statements

• Federal leaders quickly characterized the incident in ways Ellison found prejudicial; he criticized immediate justifications without waiting for investigations.
• Ellison contrasts that reaction with the usual bipartisan practice of offering condolences and awaiting evidence.

Federal investigation, access to evidence, and resignations

• DOJ Civil Rights Division reportedly declined to open a use-of-force probe.
• Multiple assistant U.S. attorneys resigned over the handling of the case.
• State/local prosecutors have been told they cannot access the FBI’s investigative file (evidence cited: bullet casings, the vehicle), which Ellison calls unjust and unusual.

Legal posture toward ICE and Minnesota’s lawsuit

• Ellison clarified Minnesota’s lawsuit focuses on ICE’s current conduct and constitutionality of certain actions, not abolishing ICE.
• ICE must comply with Fourth Amendment protections and administrative law; arbitrary federal policy or violations of state sovereignty are legally challengeable.

Protests, civil disobedience, and what counts as “impeding”

• Ellison highlighted the line between protected protest (noise, criticism) and illegal interference (physically blocking agents or assault).
• Courts, not political rhetoric, define “impeding” — and most protests have been lawful, he said.

Separation ordinance vs. “sanctuary city”

• Minnesota’s approach is to refuse to act as federal immigration enforcement deputies; the state does notify ICE where required but will not detain people beyond lawful periods to satisfy ICE detainers.

Insurrection Act — implications and legal response

• Invoking the Insurrection Act would allow federal troops to patrol state streets and protect federal agents, but would not suspend elections.
• Ellison: the state would litigate such a move; the Act requires showing local incapacity or refusal — which he believes isn’t present.

Somali community, fraud allegations, and politics

• Ellison defends Somali Minnesotans as contributors to the economy and civic life.
• He rejects the narrative that Democrats ignored fraud in Somali communities; Minnesota prosecutes Medicaid/fraud cases across communities.
• He views the federal surge as politically motivated and racially tinged rather than a serious fraud enforcement effort.

Political fallout and leadership

• Governor Tim Walz stepped back from his reelection bid amid controversy; Ellison expressed personal support but did not announce gubernatorial ambitions.
• Ellison urges truthful public communication, disciplined protest, legal challenges, and increased voter mobilization as responses.

Notable quotes

• On federal statements: “I thought they were deeply callous. And I thought they showed no compassion for Ms. Good or her family…”
• On weaponization of criminal justice: “This is clearly a weaponization of the criminal justice system…”
• On protest vs. obstruction: “How is blowing a whistle impeding the lawful exercise of a warrant? … There are laws… but interrupting is not necessarily interfering.”
• Closing exhortation: “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”

Action items / What Ellison recommends

• Support and follow Hennepin County’s criminal investigation into the killing.
• Publicly counter disinformation and explain Minnesota’s policies and legal distinctions.
• Encourage disciplined, lawful protest that preserves First Amendment protections.
• Channel civic power through voting to influence policy and leadership responses.
• Prepare legal challenges if the federal government invokes the Insurrection Act or otherwise oversteps.

Practical implications for Minnesotans

• Federal troop deployment under the Insurrection Act would change street-level policing dynamics (active-duty troops present) but would not cancel elections.
• If you’re protesting: nonviolent vocal disruption is likely protected; physical obstruction can lead to arrest.
• State officials are positioning to use the courts to challenge federal actions they view as unlawful or overreaching.

Produced by Vox’s Today Explained; guest: Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison; host: Ested/Estet Herndon.