Listen to the article
Minnesota Department of Corrections Challenges Federal Claims on Immigration Detainees
The Minnesota Department of Corrections has launched a dedicated webpage to address what it describes as misinformation being spread by the federal Department of Homeland Security regarding immigration detainees in the state.
According to the DOC, federal officials have claimed that 1,360 individuals with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers are currently in custody in Minnesota. However, state officials strongly dispute this figure, stating that the actual number is approximately 300 detainees — with about 94 held in county jails and 207 in state prisons — revealing a discrepancy of roughly 1,000 people.
This public contradiction highlights growing tensions between state and federal authorities on immigration enforcement matters, particularly as the issue remains politically charged across the nation.
The dispute extends beyond just numbers. The Minnesota DOC has also challenged statements made by the U.S. Border Patrol following the fatal shooting of 37-year-old Alex Pretti during an operation in Minneapolis.
Hours after the deadly incident, U.S. Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino held a press conference claiming the operation targeted an individual named Jose Huerta-Chuma, who Bovino characterized as having “a significant criminal history.”
Minnesota corrections officials forcefully refuted this characterization, stating that the man identified by Bovino has never been in Minnesota DOC custody. According to state records, court documents show no felony commitments associated with Huerta-Chuma, and public records only reveal misdemeanor-level traffic offenses from over a decade ago. The DOC further clarified that Huerta-Chuma is not currently under their supervision.
“We believe it’s important to provide accurate information to the public,” said a DOC spokesperson. “The discrepancies between federal claims and state records raise serious concerns about the coordination and communication between agencies.”
In a significant revelation, DOC records indicate that an individual with Huerta-Chuma’s name was previously held in federal immigration custody in a Minnesota jail in 2018, during former President Trump’s administration. The DOC emphasized that any decisions regarding that person’s release from federal custody would have been made by federal authorities, not state officials.
Immigration enforcement has become increasingly contentious in Minnesota and nationwide, with disagreements between state and federal agencies often reflecting broader political divides on immigration policy. Some states have adopted sanctuary policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities, while others have aligned more closely with federal enforcement efforts.
The public dispute over detainee numbers comes amid heightened scrutiny of immigration enforcement tactics following several high-profile incidents across the country, including the Minneapolis shooting. Community advocates have called for greater transparency in joint operations between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.
Legal experts note that discrepancies in detainee counts can stem from different methodologies, definitions, or reporting periods, but a disparity of over 1,000 individuals suggests more fundamental disagreements about who should be counted and how.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s administration has generally maintained that immigration enforcement is primarily a federal responsibility, while focusing state resources on public safety priorities that directly impact Minnesota communities.
The DOC’s unusual step of creating a dedicated webpage to counter federal claims reflects the seriousness with which state officials view the information gap. The page provides detailed breakdowns of current detainee numbers and clarifications regarding individuals in custody, part of what the department describes as an effort to ensure public understanding is based on accurate information.
As this interagency dispute continues to unfold, it underscores broader challenges in America’s complex and often fragmented approach to immigration enforcement, where federal, state, and local authorities sometimes operate with different priorities and information systems.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
24 Comments
This dispute highlights the ongoing challenges in balancing immigration enforcement with the rights and concerns of local communities. A nuanced, compassionate approach is needed.
Absolutely. It’s important to find solutions that respect the rule of law while also addressing the unique needs and perspectives of the communities affected.
The discrepancy in detainee numbers is troubling and raises concerns about the transparency and accuracy of the information being provided. This needs to be addressed.
Agreed. Both state and federal authorities should be held accountable for presenting reliable data and justifying their claims to the public.
This seems like a complex issue with conflicting claims between state and federal authorities. It would be helpful to have more details and context to understand the full picture.
Yes, the discrepancy in detainee numbers is quite significant. It’s important that both sides provide transparent and accurate data to the public.
The discrepancy in detainee numbers is troubling and raises questions about the accuracy of the information being provided. Transparency is crucial in such matters.
Yes, it’s important that both state and federal authorities present reliable data and justify their claims. The public deserves the full truth.
The fatal shooting during a Border Patrol operation is deeply concerning and warrants a thorough, independent investigation. Accountability is crucial in such matters.
Absolutely. The public deserves a clear and impartial account of the incident and any necessary actions to prevent similar tragedies.
Immigration enforcement is a sensitive and politically charged topic. I hope the authorities can work together to resolve this dispute in a fair and responsible manner.
Agreed. Clarity and open communication between state and federal agencies is crucial, especially on such a contentious issue.
The fatal shooting during a Border Patrol operation is concerning. A thorough, impartial investigation is needed to understand the circumstances and ensure accountability.
Absolutely. Any use of force by law enforcement must be scrutinized, and the public deserves a full accounting of the incident.
This dispute highlights the ongoing challenges in balancing immigration enforcement with the rights and concerns of local communities. A nuanced approach is needed.
Agreed, a balanced and fair-minded approach that considers all stakeholders is essential in resolving these kinds of conflicts.
The fatal shooting during a Border Patrol operation is deeply concerning and warrants a thorough, independent investigation. Accountability and transparency are crucial.
I agree. Any use of force by law enforcement must be carefully scrutinized, and the public deserves a clear and impartial account of the incident.
This dispute seems to underscore the need for better coordination and communication between state and federal authorities on immigration enforcement. A collaborative approach is key.
Yes, it’s important that all levels of government work together to find solutions that address the concerns of local communities while upholding the rule of law.
This highlights the ongoing tensions and challenges around immigration enforcement. I hope both sides can find common ground and work towards a resolution.
Agreed, a constructive dialogue is needed to address these complex issues in a fair and humane manner.
This dispute highlights the ongoing tensions and challenges around immigration enforcement. It’s important that state and federal authorities work together to find solutions.
Agreed. A collaborative approach that considers the needs and concerns of all stakeholders is essential in addressing these complex issues.