Listen to the article
A federal judge in Minnesota has blocked the Trump administration from destroying or altering evidence related to a fatal shooting involving a Border Patrol agent in Minneapolis last Saturday. The ruling comes amid growing tensions between state and federal authorities over jurisdiction and transparency in the investigation.
Judge Eric Tostrud issued a temporary restraining order after the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension filed a lawsuit to preserve evidence in the shooting death of Alex Pretti. The 37-year-old Minneapolis resident and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ICU nurse was killed during an immigration enforcement operation.
According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Pretti approached Border Patrol agents armed with a 9mm pistol and “violently resisted” when they attempted to disarm him. The confrontation occurred during what federal officials have described as part of “Operation Metro Surge,” an immigration enforcement initiative by the Trump administration.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, names several federal agencies as defendants, including DHS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), and U.S. Border Control, as well as Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“Federal agents are not above the law and Alex Pretti is certainly not beneath it,” Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said in a statement. “A full, impartial, and transparent investigation into his fatal shooting at the hands of DHS agents is non-negotiable.”
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty emphasized her office’s determination to investigate the incident thoroughly. “I will not rest, my team will not rest, until we have done everything in our power, everything within our authority, to achieve transparency and accountability,” she stated.
The legal dispute highlights a growing jurisdictional conflict between state and federal authorities. Minnesota officials claim they were previously barred from inspecting evidence collected at the scene, which is now in federal custody. Judge Tostrud’s order prevents federal officials from destroying any evidence related to the shooting and scheduled a hearing for Monday to review the order.
The case has intensified already strained relations between Minnesota officials and the Trump administration over immigration enforcement actions in the state. In a separate statement, Ellison expressed “intense grief and anger” over Pretti’s death during what he described as a federal operation in Minnesota cities. He indicated his office would argue in court Monday to end “this illegal and unconstitutional occupation of our cities and the terror and violence it’s inflicting.”
The incident has sparked protests in Minneapolis, a city still recovering from civil unrest following the 2020 killing of George Floyd. Community members have gathered at the scene of the shooting, demanding answers about the circumstances surrounding Pretti’s death.
The Department of Homeland Security has stated it is leading the investigation into the shooting, which has raised questions about jurisdictional authority and accountability in cases involving federal agents operating in local communities.
This case occurs against the backdrop of broader national debates about immigration enforcement tactics and federal-state cooperation. The Trump administration has emphasized stronger immigration enforcement as a key policy priority, while some state and local officials have pushed back against certain federal operations in their jurisdictions.
As the legal proceedings unfold, attention will focus on Monday’s hearing, which could determine whether state authorities gain greater access to evidence and potentially influence who ultimately has investigative authority in this controversial case.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
10 Comments
This is a complex and sensitive situation. I hope the investigation can establish the facts objectively and transparently. Preserving evidence is crucial for understanding what happened and ensuring accountability.
The judge’s order to preserve evidence seems prudent given the circumstances. A transparent, fact-based inquiry is crucial for public trust and to honor the life lost.
Agreed. Maintaining the integrity of the evidence is the responsible course of action at this stage.
Incidents like this highlight the need for clear policies and training to minimize the risk of unnecessary loss of life during law enforcement actions. Preserving evidence is a responsible first step.
Absolutely. Thorough, impartial investigations are essential to understand what happened and determine if any improvements are needed to procedures or practices.
This is a tragic situation. I hope the investigation can shed light on the specifics and lead to constructive changes, if warranted, to prevent similar outcomes in the future.
The judge’s decision to preserve evidence seems appropriate given the serious nature of the incident and the need for a thorough, impartial investigation. Transparency is important for public trust.
Agreed. Maintaining the integrity of the evidence is critical, regardless of the circumstances or parties involved.
I’m curious to learn more details about the operation and events leading up to the shooting. Were there any de-escalation attempts before the use of force? This deserves a careful, unbiased examination.
While the details are still emerging, this appears to be a complex and sensitive case. Preserving evidence is an important first step to ensure a thorough, unbiased investigation.