Concerns Over ‘Racist’ Label Hindered Scrutiny of Minnesota Fraud Scandal

In the wake of Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future scandal, allegations have emerged that claims of racism were systematically used to shield perpetrators from investigation and accountability. This pattern of deflection has reportedly hindered efforts to address what may amount to billions in fraudulent activities within the state’s social programs.

For nearly a decade, concerns about widespread fraud have circulated in Minneapolis, particularly involving programs within the Somali community. However, these concerns were frequently dismissed by elected officials as stemming from racial bias rather than legitimate oversight concerns.

“The whole story kind of died under these accusations that people were being racist,” explained Bill Glahn, policy fellow with Center of the American Experiment. “Oh, maybe somebody stole a little bit here, a little bit there, but there’s nothing systemic going on.”

Former assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Teirab, who helped lead federal prosecutions in the Feeding Our Future case, described how individuals implicated in the fraud scheme deliberately invoked accusations of racial targeting as a defense strategy. According to Teirab, suspects explicitly raised race as an issue during a secretly recorded meeting with Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.

“It provided cover,” Teirab said. “Fraudsters knew the issue of race and racism was something they could use as a cudgel…It’s disrespectful to use those terms when they’re not appropriate, especially in a case where fraud clearly happened.”

In one particularly troubling instance during a trial, a juror was allegedly approached with a $120,000 cash bribe, accompanied by messaging that framed the investigation as racially motivated. This approach appears to have been part of a broader strategy to discredit the entire investigative process.

Minnesota Republican State Senator Mark Koran emphasized that investigators followed evidence rather than demographics. He noted that fraud prosecutions affected one community disproportionately simply because that’s where significant fraud was uncovered, not due to any targeting based on race.

“The average Minnesotan, average legislator, doesn’t care who’s committing the fraud,” Koran stated. “All right, the evidence will lead you either to or from the perpetrator. And so, if the evidence leads to the perpetrator, we need to prosecute all of them.”

The scale of the fraud appears substantial. While federal authorities may ultimately prosecute around $2 billion in fraud, Koran suggested that true annual losses across state programs could be much higher when accounting for both outright fraud and ineffective service delivery. The situation was reportedly exacerbated by families participating in related schemes, including receiving kickbacks from fraudulent autism service providers.

A pivotal moment occurred when Minnesota’s Department of Education initially detected signs of fraud and temporarily halted payments. Minneapolis political figures Omar Fateh and Jamal Osman immediately pushed back, claiming the stoppage was racially motivated. They even pursued legal action against the state, though their case was eventually dismissed.

The damage, however, was done. Payments resumed, and crucially, Governor Tim Walz reportedly declined to use his subpoena power to obtain Feeding Our Future’s bank records, despite having the authority to do so—a decision that critics argue delayed exposure of the fraud.

A legislative auditor’s report found that Minnesota Department of Education officials felt compelled to handle the nonprofit “carefully” due to racism allegations and the risk of negative media coverage. This concern reportedly influenced which regulatory actions the department took or avoided.

Political commentator Dustin Grage highlighted another factor enabling the fraud: media hesitation. According to Grage, conservative reporters described encountering internal roadblocks when pitching stories about the scandal because editors feared being accused of racism.

Glahn offered another perspective on the political dynamics, noting that the concentrated Somali vote in Minnesota can be decisive in close elections. “If you don’t have the Somali vote on your side, you’re not making it to the general election,” he explained, suggesting political calculations may have influenced oversight decisions.

The consequences of this hesitancy to investigate have been severe: taxpayers have reportedly lost billions, and the vulnerable communities these programs were designed to serve have suffered from misappropriated funds.

As Minnesota works toward accountability and reform, those who spoke with Fox News Digital emphasized that effectively combating fraud requires both the courage to follow evidence wherever it leads and the fortitude to withstand attempts to characterize legitimate scrutiny as something it is not.