Listen to the article
Federal Immigration Agencies Divided Over Minneapolis Shooting Response
Deep internal divisions have emerged within federal immigration enforcement over how the Department of Homeland Security is handling the public messaging after a deadly Border Patrol shooting in Minneapolis, Fox News has learned.
More than half a dozen federal law enforcement officials involved in immigration enforcement report growing frustration with senior officials’ public characterization of the incident, creating internal debates about tone, strategy, and credibility as scrutiny intensifies.
The incident occurred during a morning immigration enforcement operation last Saturday when a Border Patrol agent fatally shot Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old Minneapolis resident who worked as a Veterans Affairs intensive care unit nurse. Authorities stated Pretti was armed with a handgun and two magazines at the time.
In the aftermath, DHS officials publicly described Pretti as a domestic terrorist who was attempting to “inflict maximum damage” on federal agents or carry out a “massacre.” This characterization has drawn significant criticism from within the department, according to sources familiar with the matter.
Officials say multiple videos that later emerged have called into question the DHS narrative, intensifying frustration among agents who believe senior leadership moved too quickly to characterize the incident before all facts were established. This premature framing, they argue, has damaged the department’s credibility with the public.
“DHS is making the situation worse,” one official told Fox News, while another added that “we are losing this war, we are losing the base and the narrative.” Some described the department’s response as “a case study on how not to do crisis PR.”
The internal disputes appear to be damaging from both public relations and morale standpoints, eroding trust within the agency and intensifying broader debates over how DHS leadership handles high-profile, politically charged incidents. Some officials expressed being so “fed up” that they wish they could retire.
Another point of contention involves the common confusion between federal immigration agencies. Some officials expressed frustration that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) routinely receives blame for actions taken by the Border Patrol, which operates as a separate agency under the DHS umbrella.
When contacted for comment, DHS defended its approach: “We have seen a highly coordinated campaign of violence against our law enforcement. This individual committed a federal crime while armed as he obstructed an active law enforcement operation. As with any situation that is evolving, we work to give swift, accurate information to the American people as more information becomes available.”
The officials who spoke with Fox News emphasized that they support the administration’s mass deportation agenda but harbor serious concerns about the messaging and implementation strategies. These internal frictions have now escalated, with widespread criticism that the aggressive tactics championed by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem are eroding public support for immigration enforcement policies while potentially putting federal agents at risk.
The Minneapolis incident has become a flashpoint in an already tense national debate over immigration enforcement. Protests erupted in Minneapolis following the shooting, with demonstrators confronting federal agents at various locations throughout the city.
This controversy occurs against the backdrop of broader tensions within the administration’s immigration enforcement apparatus. Fox News previously reported in October that competing camps inside DHS were divided over enforcement priorities, tactics, and deportation strategies.
As investigations into the Minneapolis shooting continue, the fallout appears to be widening fissures between frontline agents and senior leadership at a time when immigration enforcement remains one of the most politically charged issues in American governance.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
7 Comments
As an immigrant myself, I’m concerned about the implications of this incident for community relations with law enforcement. Rebuilding trust will require a thorough, unbiased investigation and a commitment to de-escalation tactics.
This highlights the need for clear communication and alignment within the government on sensitive issues like immigration enforcement. Conflicting narratives can sow confusion and distrust among the public.
You make a good point. Consistency and transparency from federal agencies are crucial, especially when high-profile incidents occur. The public deserves a unified, credible account of the facts.
The characterization of the individual as a ‘domestic terrorist’ seems premature and potentially inflammatory. I hope federal agencies can work to provide a balanced, fact-based account of the events to build public trust.
I agree, rushing to label someone as a terrorist without a full investigation could undermine public confidence. Careful, impartial fact-finding is important in these sensitive situations.
This is a concerning incident that raises many questions. I’m curious to learn more about the internal divisions within federal immigration agencies over the handling of this case. Transparency and accountability are crucial when it comes to use of force by law enforcement.
This is a complex issue with important public safety and civil liberties considerations. I hope the relevant federal agencies can work together to provide a clear, balanced explanation of the events and their aftermath.