Minnesota officials are standing firm against demands from U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to hand over voter data and reshape the state's immigration policies, marking a dramatic escalation in the conflict between the state and the Trump administration over an unprecedented surge of federal immigration enforcement agents in Minneapolis and Saint Paul.
The confrontation centers on what federal authorities call "Operation Metro Surge," launched in December 2025, which has deployed more than 3,000 federal immigration officers to Minnesota. Of those, 2,000 are from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, with hundreds more from Border Patrol and other Justice Department agencies. The operation has sparked chaos across the Twin Cities, with schools closing, businesses reporting revenue losses of 50 to 80 percent, and residents afraid to leave their homes.
Bondi's letter to Minnesota officials explicitly tied the immigration enforcement operation to demands that the state provide voter roll data, end what the federal government calls "sanctuary policies," and commit state law enforcement resources to support the federal raids. Minnesota's attorneys have characterized this as extortion, arguing the Trump administration is using the threat of continued enforcement operations to coerce policy changes.
Background
The conflict between Minnesota and the federal government began in early January 2026 when President Trump signaled plans to escalate immigration enforcement. On January 4, the administration singled out Minnesota for what it described as the largest immigration operation in the country's history.
Federal officials, including Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, claimed the massive deployment was necessary to root out fraud in Minnesota. Noem stated that "the amount of fraud in Minnesota is unprecedented" and that the additional agents were deployed to "help get to the bottom of it."
However, Minnesota officials and a coalition of 20 state attorneys general have challenged this justification. They point out that noncitizen immigrants without legal status make up only about 1.5 percent of Minnesota's population, less than half the national average. States like Texas, Florida, and Utah have higher percentages of undocumented immigrants but have not seen similar federal operations.
On January 12, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, along with the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security and related agencies, seeking to halt the operation and declare it unconstitutional and unlawful.
Key Details
The federal operation has had severe consequences for everyday life in Minnesota. Schools across Minneapolis have been forced into lockdown. More than 100 schools in the Minneapolis Public School system temporarily shut down, affecting 30,000 children. School attendance has continued to drop as families are afraid to send their children to school.
Businesses have been hit hard. Pregnant women are avoiding prenatal appointments for fear that they or loved ones will be detained. Customers have stopped visiting retail stores, restaurants, and other businesses due to the heavy federal presence.
The strain on local law enforcement has been significant. By January 9, Minneapolis Police officers had already worked more than 3,000 hours of overtime responding to incidents created by the federal operation, costing taxpayers more than $2 million in just a few days.
On January 7, the situation turned deadly when a federal agent shot and killed Renee Good. This incident appears to have prompted the DOJ's demand for state data, as Bondi's letter came shortly after.
The Data Demand
Bondi's letter marked the first time the Trump administration explicitly tied its immigration enforcement actions to requests for voter data. The demand also included data on Medicaid and food assistance programs. Minnesota's attorneys argue this reveals the true purpose of the operation: political coercion rather than legitimate immigration enforcement.
"Their message is clear," Minnesota attorney Middlecamp said in court. "Minnesota can change its laws and policies or suffer invasion of mass armed forces."
The state has asked a federal judge to temporarily pause the immigration enforcement operation, arguing that it violates the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states.
What This Means
The clash between Minnesota and the Trump administration represents a fundamental dispute over federal authority and state sovereignty. Minnesota's lawsuit argues that the federal government cannot use immigration enforcement as a tool to coerce states into changing their policies or providing data.
A coalition of 20 attorneys general, including those from California, New York, and other states, have filed a brief supporting Minnesota's position. They argue that the federal operation is impeding states' ability to provide basic services like education and public safety.
The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching consequences for how federal immigration enforcement operates across the country and what use the federal government can use to pressure states on policy matters. If Minnesota prevails, it could set limits on how aggressively the federal government can deploy immigration agents in states that resist federal demands.
For now, the Twin Cities remain a flashpoint in a larger struggle over the balance of power between Washington and the states.
