Twin Cities Law Enforcement Leaders Warn of Civil Rights Concerns Linked to Federal Agent Activity, Call for Oversight and Accountability
Published: January 20th, 2026
TWIN CITIES, MINNESOTA: Law enforcement leaders from across the Twin Cities metro area held a joint press conference on Tuesday, January 20, 2026, to publicly address mounting concerns over the conduct of a small group of federal agents operating in Minnesota, warning that recent actions may be violating constitutional protections, damaging public trust, and undermining public safety.
The briefing was moderated by a public information officer for the St. Paul Police Department and featured remarks from the Brooklyn Park Police Department's police chief, the St. Paul Police Department's chief, and the Hennepin County Sheriff.
Officials repeatedly emphasized that their concerns are not directed at immigration enforcement as a concept, nor are they calling for the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Instead, they said they are raising alarms about how enforcement is being carried out amid a recent surge of federal activity in Minnesota.
Allegations of Unconstitutional Stops and Racial Profiling
Brooklyn Park Police Chief Mark Bruley said local agencies have received numerous complaints over the past two weeks from residents who reported being stopped in traffic or approached on the street without reasonable suspicion, then questioned or pressured to provide immigration documentation.
According to the chief, the complaints escalated after off-duty police officers from multiple departments reported similar encounters. All of the off-duty officers who came forward, he said, were people of color.
One incident the chief described involved an off-duty Brooklyn Park officer who was allegedly boxed in by federal agents while driving, confronted with firearms drawn, and prevented from recording the encounter when her phone was knocked from her hand. The agents reportedly left the scene immediately after she identified herself as a police officer, without explanation or apology.
“This is not just concerning because it happened to police officers,” the chief said. “It’s concerning because our officers know the Constitution, and they know when something is wrong. If this is happening to them, it’s happening to community members too.”
Leaders Stress Issue Is Limited — But Impact Is Widespread
It was repeatedly stated that these leaders do not believe the behavior is widespread across federal law enforcement agencies. Instead, they described the issue as involving a limited number of agents, possibly connected to a recent surge of Border Patrol and other federal personnel into the metro area.
The Brooklyn Park police chief also said that, amid the complaints, he has been personally contacted by multiple ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents who privately expressed that the tactics described by community members and local law enforcement were not reflective of how their agencies are trained to operate. According to the chief, those agents told him the conduct being reported, including unwarranted stops and aggressive engagement, was unacceptable and not representative of their standard practices, reinforcing his belief that the problematic behavior stems from a limited subgroup rather than from official federal policy or higher-level directives.
However, officials said even a small number of problematic encounters can have outsized consequences.
“When armed individuals wearing ‘police’ on their vests step into our communities and act unlawfully, the public doesn’t distinguish between federal and local agencies,” the Brooklyn Park chief said. “They think that’s us.”
Several departments have since distributed public education materials explaining the differences between local police officers and federal agents to address community confusion and fear.
St. Paul Police Chief: Civil Rights Must Remain the Foundation
St. Paul Police Chief Axel Henry echoed those concerns, saying city employees had also reported questionable traffic stops involving federal agents, though without weapons being drawn, as the Brooklyn Park Chief had reported seeing earlier.
Henry addressed the criticism he said law enforcement leaders expected to face.
“Some will say we’re only speaking up because this happened to cops,” he said. “Others will say that speaking out against ICE and that means we want rapists on the street. Neither of those things is true. We want to find some common ground. Law enforcement has more authority than a general citizen.”
Henry emphasized that law enforcement authority comes with heightened responsibility, and any system that results in U.S. citizens being stopped or seized without lawful justification is fundamentally broken.
“Everyone’s civil rights are entacted. Everyone’s Civil rights are important,” he said. “They have to be the cornerstone of everything we do.”
Sheriff: Trust Is Fragile and Essential to Public Safety
Hennepin County Sheriff Dawanna Witt framed her remarks around trust, history, and the long-term consequences of discriminatory enforcement, emphasizing that the issue extends far beyond individual encounters.
Witt said she is hearing increasing reports of people in Hennepin County being stopped, questioned, or harassed solely because of the color of their skin, stressing that “solely” was the key word. She made clear that this kind of treatment is illegal, unethical, and unacceptable, regardless of which agency is responsible.
Her remarks focused heavily on the fragility of trust, particularly in communities that have already endured years of tension and trauma. Witt reminded the public that Minneapolis and Hennepin County became ground zero for national civil unrest five years ago, and that local law enforcement agencies have since invested enormous effort into rebuilding relationships with residents.
According to Witt, progress is now being actively eroded by the actions of a small number of federal agents. Even if those agents do not represent federal law enforcement as a whole, she warned that the damage spreads to every badge, including local police and sheriff’s deputies who live and work in the same communities.
She explained that trust is not an abstract concept, but a core pillar of public safety:
Trust determines whether victims feel safe calling 911
Trust affects whether witnesses come forward
Trust influences whether parents feel safe sending their children to school or church
Trust impacts whether businesses can operate without fear
When trust breaks down, Witt said, everyone is less safe, not just immigrants or people of color, but the broader community.
The sheriff also spoke personally about being stereotyped and profiled, saying she understands what it means to be “seen before being understood.” That lived experience, she said, reinforces why law enforcement leaders cannot remain silent when they see behavior that mirrors the very injustices agencies have worked to correct.
Importantly, Witt was careful to avoid broad accusations. She explicitly stated that she was not condemning all federal agents, noting that law enforcement professionals should not be stereotyped, just as community members should not. However, she emphasized that when even one officer acts unlawfully, the cost is shared by all.
She concluded with a direct call for accountability and leadership, saying now is not the time for silence. When there are concrete examples of profiling or civil rights violations, she argued, leaders have a responsibility to speak up — even when doing so is uncomfortable or politically sensitive.
At its core, Witt’s message was that law enforcement legitimacy depends on moral authority as much as legal authority. Without dignity, humanity, and integrity, she warned, policing loses the very foundation that allows it to function effectively in a democratic society.
Attorney: Constitution Applies to Everyone, but Tensions Are Escalating
Minnesota attorney Imran Ali, who said he regularly works with law enforcement agencies across the state, offered a legal perspective during the question-and-answer portion of the press conference, adding nuance and caution to the discussion. Ali acknowledged that federal immigration agents have lawful authority to carry out their duties and emphasized that those agents are often acting under direct orders. He noted that interfering with or obstructing lawful federal enforcement remains illegal, regardless of how emotionally charged or controversial the situation may be.
However, Ali made clear that federal authority is not unlimited and that the U.S. Constitution applies to everyone, including U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike. He said allegations of unlawful stops, detentions, or profiling raise serious constitutional questions that must be addressed through legal processes, not public confrontation.
As a lawyer, Ali stressed that courts, not the street, are the appropriate venue for resolving disputes over federal enforcement tactics. He pointed to the growing number of civil lawsuits already being filed nationwide, saying those cases are designed to determine whether constitutional lines were crossed and to hold agencies accountable when necessary.
At the same time, Ali warned that escalating rhetoric and emotionally charged encounters are creating dangerous spillover effects, particularly for local law enforcement officers who are not involved in immigration operations.
He said he has seen and heard about numerous incidents in which local officers responding to unrelated calls were yelled at, threatened, or aggressively confronted by members of the public angry over federal enforcement actions. Ali cautioned that this kind of behavior further destabilizes already tense situations and increases the risk of misunderstandings or violence. “That can’t happen,” Ali said, underscoring that local officers are still responsible for responding to emergencies and maintaining public safety, regardless of federal policy debates.
Ali’s remarks served as a reminder that accountability must operate within the rule of law, even when emotions are high. While he did not dispute the seriousness of the allegations raised by police chiefs, he emphasized that legal remedies already exist, and that undermining lawful processes or targeting unrelated officers only makes resolution more difficult.
In essence, Ali drew a clear distinction between:
Lawful criticism and legal challenges, which he said are appropriate and necessary
Street-level confrontations and obstruction, which he warned can worsen tensions and put people at risk
His comments reinforced the broader message from law enforcement leaders: that civil rights, public safety, and constitutional accountability are not competing goals, but interconnected ones, and that resolving current concerns will require restraint, professionalism, and adherence to legal processes on all sides.
Oversight Challenges: Fragmented Command, Limited Transparency, and Few Local Remedies
Law enforcement leaders said one of the most troubling aspects of the recent federal activity is the lack of clear oversight and accountability mechanisms available to local agencies and the public when concerns arise. Officials described what they characterized as a fragmented federal command structure, particularly during recent surges of federal personnel into Minnesota. According to multiple chiefs, local departments often cannot determine which federal agency, unit, or supervisor was responsible for an encounter reported by residents.
In several cases, chiefs said they attempted to contact leadership within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Border Patrol, or other Department of Homeland Security components, only to be told that supervisors could not identify which teams were operating in specific locations on specific days.
“This span-of-control problem makes accountability incredibly difficult,” one chief explained. “If we can’t even identify who was involved, there’s no meaningful way to address complaints in real time.”
Lack of Identification and Body Cameras
Another major concern raised was the absence of visible identification on some federal agents involved in the reported encounters.
Local leaders said complaints frequently involve agents who:
Do not display name tags or badge numbers
Wear face coverings that obscure identification
Do not appear to be equipped with body-worn cameras
Wear generic “POLICE” markings that can be mistaken for local officers
This, officials said, creates confusion for both residents and local police, particularly when encounters escalate or when community members later attempt to report what happened.
“When someone files a complaint, they’re often asked to identify the agents involved,” a chief said. “But how can they do that if the agents have no names, no numbers, no body cameras, and no clear agency markings?”
Complaint Systems Viewed as Inaccessible
Several chiefs criticized existing federal complaint processes as impractical for affected residents, particularly when encounters are brief, frightening, or involve individuals who fear retaliation.
Officials said residents are typically directed to online complaint portals, which often require:
Specific agent identification
Dates, times, and unit information that residents may not have
A level of legal and procedural knowledge that many community members lack
As a result, leaders said many residents never file formal complaints, making it difficult to document or address patterns of behavior.
“This leaves people feeling powerless,” one chief said. “If we’re struggling to get answers as police chiefs, imagine how that feels to a resident who just wants to know whether what happened to them was legal.”
No Local Jurisdiction to Investigate Federal Agents
Law enforcement leaders emphasized that local and state agencies lack jurisdiction to formally investigate federal agents for on-duty conduct, even when the alleged actions occur within city or county boundaries. While local departments said they document complaints and attempt to elevate concerns through professional channels, they acknowledged that enforcement authority ultimately rests with federal oversight bodies or the courts.
The result, they said, is a significant gap between community harm and institutional response.
“People assume we can investigate this the same way we would any other complaint,” one official said. “We can’t. Our authority simply doesn’t extend there.”
Training and Vetting Concerns During Federal Surges
During the Q&A portion of the press conference, leaders also raised questions about training consistency and vetting, particularly during rapid deployments or surges of federal personnel.
Chiefs said they have privately discussed concerns with federal counterparts about whether all deployed agents receive:
Consistent constitutional policing training
Adequate instruction on local laws and norms
Sufficient supervision during street-level operations
While officials stressed that many federal agents are highly trained and professional, they said surges may have introduced personnel with varying levels of experience, increasing the risk of improper tactics.
“This isn’t just about numbers,” one chief said. “One or two bad encounters can undo years of trust-building work.”
Ripple Effects for Local Law Enforcement
Leaders warned that these oversight gaps create secondary consequences for local police departments, who are often left to manage community fear and anger generated by actions they did not control. Several agencies said they have felt compelled to issue public statements, distribute informational flyers, or explain the differences between local police and federal agents to reassure residents.
“When people see armed individuals acting unlawfully and wearing ‘police’ on their vests, they don’t distinguish agencies,” one chief said. “They think it’s us.”
Officials said that erosion of trust does not stop at immigration enforcement, but can affect:
Willingness to call 911
Cooperation with investigations
Attendance at schools, churches, and community events
Overall perceptions of law enforcement legitimacy
Calls for Clearer Federal Leadership and Accountability
Despite the concerns, law enforcement leaders reiterated they are not accusing federal agencies as a whole, nor claiming directives are coming from national leadership.
Instead, they said they are calling for:
Clearer lines of supervision
Transparent identification standards
Stronger internal accountability
Better coordination with local agencies during federal operations
“Our goal is not confrontation,” one leader said. “It’s to prevent harm, protect civil rights, and make sure enforcement is lawful and professional.”
Officials concluded that without meaningful improvements in oversight and transparency, even isolated misconduct will continue to damage public trust, making communities less safe for everyone.
You can watch the full press conference provided above by FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul on YouTube.
Written by Will Wight.
Cover Photo Captured by the above press conference video from FOX 9.
