Listen to the article
Hennepin County Votes to Condemn ICE Presence Amid Escalating Immigration Tensions
Minneapolis-area leaders took a bold stance against federal immigration authorities on Tuesday, unanimously passing a resolution condemning ICE and calling for the removal of its personnel and assets from Minnesota.
The Hennepin County Administration, Operations and Budget Committee, comprised of seven members, emphasized they “did not take this action lightly” as they moved to formally denounce the federal agency amid the Trump administration’s intensified deportation campaign.
“It comes forward in the context of an additional 1,000 ICE agents due to arrive in the metro area during the largest deployment of DHS resources in our nation’s history, anywhere,” explained committee Vice Chair Debbie Goettel during the proceedings.
The committee framed their decision as a protective measure for local residents, with the full board scheduled to vote on formal adoption of the resolution at their January 27 meeting.
“We stand with our immigrant communities, our protesters and observers, and our neighbors standing together to bring accountability to this unconscionable show of force,” Goettel added.
The vote coincided with President Donald Trump’s announcement that his administration will begin withholding federal payments from sanctuary jurisdictions starting February 1, a move that could have significant financial implications for areas like Hennepin County.
In a statement on Truth Social, Trump claimed sanctuary cities hamper federal immigration enforcement efforts at the expense of public safety. “And it breeds fraud and crime and all the other problems that come. So we’re not making any payment to anybody that supports sanctuary,” the President wrote.
The Department of Homeland Security earlier announced plans to send additional federal agents to Minnesota to protect immigration officers conducting enforcement operations in the face of growing local protests. This escalation marks a significant intensification of federal immigration enforcement activities in the region.
Minnesota has emerged as a focal point in the administration’s deportation efforts following last week’s fatal incident involving Renee Good, who was shot by an ICE agent. According to federal officials, Good was attempting to ram the agent with her vehicle when the shooting occurred.
The controversy has deepened the divide between local and federal authorities, with the city of Minneapolis filing a lawsuit against the federal government over the immigration operations. City officials have alleged that these enforcement actions have been characterized by racial profiling and excessive force.
The situation in Minnesota reflects broader national tensions over immigration enforcement policies, with local jurisdictions increasingly finding themselves at odds with federal directives. Sanctuary cities across the country may soon face difficult decisions as the administration prepares to implement its funding restrictions.
For Hennepin County, the resolution represents a direct challenge to federal authority at a time when immigration enforcement has become increasingly contentious. The committee’s action signals growing resistance to what local leaders characterize as federal overreach in immigration matters.
As federal agents continue their operations in the Minneapolis area, the escalating conflict between local and federal authorities highlights the complex interplay between immigration enforcement and local governance. With both sides digging in, Minnesota has become a battleground in the nation’s ongoing immigration debate.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
5 Comments
Interesting to see local leaders take such a strong stance against federal immigration authorities. I’m curious to hear more about their specific rationale and proposed alternatives to the current ICE presence. This is a high-stakes issue that deserves careful consideration.
I share the concern about the escalating tensions and heavy-handed federal tactics. However, removing ICE entirely could create a public safety vacuum. I hope the county can find a balanced approach that respects immigrant rights while upholding the law.
This is a concerning development. While immigration is a complex issue, removing ICE presence could have unintended consequences for public safety and rule of law. I hope the county considers the full implications before taking such a drastic step.
I appreciate the desire to protect immigrant communities, but ICE serves an important function that should not be dismissed lightly. Perhaps a more nuanced approach could address concerns while maintaining essential security measures.
The Trump administration’s deportation campaign has certainly raised alarm, but outright banning ICE from the area seems like an extreme response. I wonder if there are more measured steps the county could take to address their concerns and protect vulnerable residents.