A federal judge has put a stop to the Trump administration’s push to subpoena Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and several other state officials, determining that the Justice Department was abusing its investigative authority to punish those who refused to help crack down on illegal immigration.
In a ruling made public Monday, U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz concluded that the primary purpose of the subpoenas was to pressure Minnesota officials into helping enforce federal immigration law and to punish them for declining to do so. The judge found the connection between the information being sought and any actual criminal activity to be “extremely weak to nonexistent.”
Tensions between the Trump administration and Minnesota’s Democratic leadership had been building since January, when federal immigration officers clashed with protesters in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area — particularly following the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers.
President Donald Trump had threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to suppress the protests and accused Walz — who served as Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ running mate in 2024 — along with other officials, of encouraging demonstrators to interfere with Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations.
The subpoenas, issued in January, were part of a probe into whether Walz and other officials had obstructed or interfered with law enforcement. They were directed at the offices of Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, and officials in Ramsey and Hennepin counties.
Judge Schiltz wrote that the materials sought in the subpoenas “largely if not entirely relate to constitutionally protected conduct,” and noted that Minnesota has every legal right to decline using its resources to enforce federal immigration law. He concluded that the Justice Department “is not conducting a criminal investigation” but is instead misusing the grand jury process for unlawful purposes.
The judge added that the evidence pointing to an unlawful motive was overwhelming, saying the Justice Department “has struggled — without success — to identify a single plausible investigatory justification” for the subpoenas. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.
In a statement following the ruling, Walz called it “a victory for the rule of law and our democracy.” He went on to say, “The U.S. Justice Department is pursuing criminal investigations into the President’s political opponents. This case was just one example of that, but we are seeing daily reminders of this administration’s lawlessness — in Minnesota and around the country. We all must continue to seek justice and uphold the rule of law.”
Attorney General Ellison said “it should disturb every American that Donald Trump is weaponizing the criminal justice system against people he disagrees with.”
Mayor Her described the subpoenas as “a politically motivated retaliation against our city for lawfully standing up to ICE and fighting for our residents.”
Mayor Frey said the investigation was “never about justice, law, and order, but the absence of it,” adding that “subpoenaing political opponents because they spoke on behalf of their constituents violates the core tenets of our democracy and human decency.” He also pointed out that criticizing government action is not a crime, saying, “One of the defining strengths of our democracy is the ability to challenge those in power without fear of retribution. Elected officials have both the right and the responsibility to speak honestly about how government decisions affect the people they serve.”
This ruling is part of a broader pattern of federal courts pushing back against the Justice Department’s efforts to aggressively advance the Trump administration’s agenda. Over the past year, judges have dismissed indictments against two high-profile Trump critics — former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James — and grand juries have repeatedly declined to return indictments the Justice Department sought.
Critics argue these developments reflect growing concerns that the Justice Department, which is supposed to operate independently of the White House, has been politicized under the current administration.
Separately, Vice President JD Vance has called on the Justice Department to investigate Walz and Ellison over allegations that they failed to prevent widespread social services fraud. The department has not indicated whether it will open such an investigation. Both Walz and Ellison have dismissed those allegations as politically motivated and defended their anti-fraud efforts in Minnesota.
Legal battles connected to the immigration surge continue on other fronts as well. The federal government has argued that Minnesota prosecutors lack jurisdiction to investigate federal officers. Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty filed a lawsuit in March seeking access to evidence in the Good and Pretti killings, accusing the administration of withholding materials from state investigators. Moriarty has also pursued criminal charges against ICE officers in two other incidents, including the nonfatal shooting of a Venezuelan man, and has indicated her office is looking into several additional cases.
