US judge blocks subpoenas targeting Minnesota Democrats after finding DOJ probe politically motivated

The probe and the subpoenas

In January 2026, at the height of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, the Justice Department issued grand jury subpoenas to six Minnesota officials. The targets included Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, Attorney General Keith Ellison, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarity and commissioners in Ramsey and Hennepin counties. Federal prosecutors were investigating whether the Democrats had impeded immigration enforcement during “Operation Metro Surge” (the deployment of thousands of agents to the Twin Cities).

The subpoenas (dated 20 January) arrived as the administration intensified its push against so-called sanctuary jurisdictions. Four days later, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi sent Walz a letter demanding Minnesota repeal its “sanctuary policies” and hand over voter registration, food-stamp and Medicaid records.

Fatal shootings and public outcry

The enforcement surge triggered violent confrontations. On 7 January federal agents shot and killed Renee Good, a mother of three, in Minneapolis. On 24 January Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old nurse, was fatally shot by agents in the same city. The two deaths drew national attention and prompted widespread protests. State and local officials denounced the raids as a power grab and an effort to intimidate perceived centres of resistance.

“The dominant purpose of the challenged subpoenas is to coerce Minnesota officials into assisting the federal government with enforcing civil immigration law and to harass and retaliate against them for failing to do so.”

Judge finds "overwhelming" improper motive

Chief US District Judge Patrick Schiltz (a George W. Bush appointee) quashed all six subpoenas in a 29-page order issued on 17 June and unsealed on Monday. Schiltz wrote that initiating a criminal investigation “in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action … is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use of the grand-jury process.” He noted the Trump administration’s “well-established history” of using criminal investigations to retaliate against adversaries, citing a similar case involving Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell. The judge concluded that the legal justifications offered by the Justice Department were “ridiculous” and that the links between the requested materials and any potential crime were “extremely weak or non-existent.”

Reactions and context

Governor Walz called the ruling “a victory for the rule of law and our democracy,” adding that the Justice Department is “pursuing criminal investigations into the President’s political opponents.” Attorney General Ellison stressed that it is “extremely rare” for judges to intervene in grand jury proceedings, calling the weaponisation of the justice system against political opponents a concern for all Americans. Minneapolis Mayor Frey praised the decision as a rejection of the “effort to weaponize [DOJ] power against elected leaders who disagree with the federal administration.” The Justice Department said it takes obstruction of law enforcement seriously and will continue to investigate such matters “in full accordance with the law.”