Justice Department opens criminal probe into Minnesota officials, subpoenas prepared

Federal prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation into Minnesota state and local officials centered on an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agents, sources familiar with the inquiry said, and subpoenas for Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey have been prepared. The inquiry, which the Justice Department declined to comment on, focuses on whether public statements and actions by officials crossed a line into unlawful obstruction of federal immigration enforcement.

Officials conducting the review are invoking a legal theory that traces to a rarely used Civil War–era statute, according to people familiar with the investigation and a memo circulated last month that listed the statute among potential enforcement tools. The memorandum, prepared by former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi and circulated to federal prosecutors, recommended a suite of statutes to bolster investigations of individuals identified as domestic threats. Bondi on social media posted, "A reminder to all those in Minnesota: No one is above the law."

Sources say the investigation was triggered in part by decisions taken by the Minnesota Department of Criminal Apprehension in the wake of the shooting death of Renee Good by a federal officer, placing the inquiry at the intersection of federal immigration enforcement, state law enforcement actions, and politically charged public statements. While the prepared subpoenas are reported to name Walz and Frey, other individuals are believed to be under scrutiny; the full scope has not been disclosed and no charges have been filed.

Mayor Frey responded to the emerging reports with a forceful public statement asserting resistance to pressure: "I will not be intimidated," he said, adding that the probe was "an obvious attempt to intimidate me for standing up for Minneapolis, our local law enforcement, and our residents against the chaos and danger this Administration has brought to our streets," and concluding, "Neither our city nor our country will succumb to this fear. We stand rock solid." The governor's office has not publicly detailed any communications with investigators.

The probe carries political and economic implications beyond courtroom strategy. Minnesota, a state of roughly 5.7 million residents with an economy in the neighborhood of $400 billion, faces potential collateral effects if the investigation deepens. State and municipal leaders already confront tight budgeting windows and fiscal pressures tied to infrastructure and social spending; an expanded federal inquiry could divert staff time and political capital, complicate negotiations over state priorities, and heighten investor scrutiny of municipal credits tied to Minneapolis and Minnesota.

Financial markets tend to react to sustained political risk with modest repricing in municipal debt spreads, though analysts note that investigations alone rarely alter long-term credit fundamentals absent material fiscal deterioration. Still, the timing matters: heightened political uncertainty in the first half of an election year can influence local borrowing costs and policy choices, especially if it affects gubernatorial or mayoral capacity to negotiate budgets or manage crises.

More broadly, the case highlights a trend toward aggressive federal legal strategies in politically contentious arenas such as immigration and public safety, including renewed interest in older statutes that prosecutors have seldom used in recent decades. How the Justice Department balances enforcement against established federal-state norms will have consequences for intergovernmental relations and for how elected officials communicate about federal agents in their jurisdictions.

Key questions remain: whether subpoenas will be served, which statutes are formally cited in investigative materials, and whether the inquiry will produce indictments. Federal and state officials have so far kept details close; the next steps will determine whether this inquiry becomes a short-lived legal review or a prolonged source of political and fiscal strain in Minnesota.