Listen to the article
Minnesota County Launches Investigation into Federal Arrest of U.S. Citizen
Ramsey County officials in Minnesota have opened an investigation into what they describe as a potential case of kidnapping, burglary, and false imprisonment following the controversial arrest of a Hmong American man by federal immigration officers.
County Attorney John Choi and Sheriff Bob Fletcher announced Monday they are seeking critical information from the Department of Homeland Security regarding the January 18 arrest of ChongLy “Scott” Thao, a 56-year-old U.S. citizen. The incident, which occurred in St. Paul, was captured on video and showed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers forcibly entering Thao’s home.
“There are many facts we don’t know yet, but there’s one that we do know. And that is that Mr. Thao is and has been an American citizen. There’s not a dispute over that,” Sheriff Fletcher told reporters. “There’s no dispute that he was taken out of his house, forcibly taken out of his home and driven around.”
According to officials, ICE agents broke down Thao’s front door at gunpoint without presenting a warrant. They then removed Thao from his home wearing only underwear and a blanket despite freezing temperatures. Witnesses captured video of the chaotic scene, which included neighbors protesting and shouting at the armed federal agents.
The Department of Homeland Security has thus far refused to cooperate with Ramsey County’s investigation. This lack of cooperation extends to other state and local investigations into killings by federal officers in Minneapolis during the previous administration’s immigration crackdown.
ICE defended its actions in a statement, calling Ramsey County’s announcement “nothing but a political stunt to demonize ICE law enforcement.” The agency insisted, “ICE does not ‘kidnap’ people.”
Thao told The Associated Press in January that the agents eventually realized he was a longtime U.S. citizen with no criminal record and returned him home after a couple of hours. DHS later claimed ICE officers had been searching for two convicted sex offenders, though Thao maintained he had never seen the men before and they did not live with him. Adding to the confusion, the Minnesota Department of Corrections later revealed that one of the wanted men was still in prison.
In its statement, ICE asserted that investigators “concluded sexual predator targets had ties to the property” – a claim that Thao and his family have denied.
Hao Nguyen, director of the trial division in the County Attorney’s Office, said officials sent formal requests to DHS, ICE, and local federal prosecutors on March 20 outlining the evidence they’re seeking.
“We know there are reports, there’s just no way that there aren’t,” Nguyen explained. “We want also to know who was working that day, who was working that month. Where did they report to? Who did they report to? We also want to understand what recordings might be out there in terms of digital recordings, witness interviews, video recordings.”
County officials have set an April 30 deadline for federal cooperation, after which they could pursue a lawsuit or convene a grand jury.
The case reflects broader tensions between Minnesota authorities and federal agencies regarding jurisdiction and accountability. The state and the chief prosecutor in neighboring Hennepin County sued the Trump administration last month to gain access to evidence needed to independently investigate three shootings by federal officers in Minneapolis, including two fatalities.
These incidents occurred during a controversial surge that brought approximately 3,000 federal law enforcement officers into Minnesota as part of immigration enforcement operations.
Sheriff Fletcher challenged the notion that federal agents are beyond state prosecution. “There is no such thing as absolute immunity for federal agents,” he said. “There’s qualified immunity for all law enforcement in a lot of different capacities. But seizing a person out of their home who’s an American citizen, they’re not immune from that.”
Both Choi and Fletcher emphasized that their investigation is focused on determining facts, not pursuing a political agenda. They urged members of the public who might have evidence about Thao’s case or other potential violations to come forward.
Thao declined to comment on Monday’s announcement by county officials.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This is a concerning incident that deserves a thorough investigation. The forcible arrest of a US citizen without a warrant raises serious questions about civil liberties and the proper use of federal authority.
I agree, the details provided raise troubling implications about potential overreach or abuse of power by immigration enforcement. Transparent accountability is crucial in such cases.
As a mining and energy investor, I’m curious to understand if this case could have broader implications for the Hmong American community and their participation in industries like mining and natural resources. Equitable treatment under the law is crucial for a healthy business climate.
That’s an interesting point. Any disruptions to the Hmong workforce or business relationships could have ripple effects across the mining and energy sectors. Maintaining an environment of stability and trust is important for these industries.
This incident highlights the importance of robust oversight and clear policies governing federal immigration enforcement, to prevent abuses and protect the rights of all US citizens. I hope the investigation yields a full accounting of what transpired.
While the specifics of this case remain unclear, the reported actions of ICE raise troubling questions about due process and civil liberties. Ensuring the fair and lawful treatment of all US citizens, regardless of background, should be a top priority.
While the full facts are still emerging, the reported actions of ICE agents in this case appear questionable at best. Proper legal procedures must be followed, even when dealing with immigration matters.
Absolutely. Any potential violations of constitutional rights need to be investigated thoroughly and swiftly, to uphold the rule of law and protect vulnerable communities.