Which federal agencies investigated the Minnesota Somali fraud cases and what were their findings?
Executive summary
Multiple federal agencies have opened or announced probes into Minnesota fraud cases tied largely to the “Feeding Our Future” and related COVID‑era relief schemes: the Department of Justice (Justice Department/US Attorneys) has led criminal charges against at least 77–78 people in large pandemic‑era fraud cases (with dozens pleading guilty), the U.S. Treasury has said it is investigating whether diverted funds reached al-Shabaab, and the Small Business Administration has announced a separate review of a network of Somali‑linked groups. Reporting shows prosecutors have not yet produced evidence linking taxpayer funds to terrorism; many federal investigations remain active [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Federal criminal prosecutions: Justice Department and the U.S. attorney’s office — wide criminal sweep, big convictions
The Department of Justice, working through the Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office, has brought what officials describe as the nation’s largest pandemic relief fraud prosecutions tied to Feeding Our Future and other schemes: at least 77–78 defendants have been charged, roughly 56 of them have pleaded guilty, and federal prosecutors secured convictions including against an alleged ringleader in the case [1] [5] [6]. Local reporting and federal press releases frame these as massive thefts of school meal and assistance dollars that federal prosecutors prioritized for criminal enforcement [5] [6].
2. Treasury Department: probe into possible terror‑financing links — public allegation, no public evidence yet
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent publicly announced the department was investigating allegations that Minnesota taxpayer dollars “may have been diverted to the terrorist organization Al‑Shabaab,” elevating a national security angle to the fraud story [2] [7]. Reuters and MPR report that Treasury launched an inquiry after administration officials cited unverified media claims; multiple federal investigators told outlets they had found no evidence so far that funds were funneled to al‑Shabaab [2] [3]. Available sources do not report a Treasury finding that confirms terror financing as of current reporting [7] [3].
3. Small Business Administration: administrative review of networks tied to the fraud
The Small Business Administration announced an investigation into a network of Somali groups in Minnesota that it says is tied to a massive COVID fraud scandal, according to network reporting cited by multiple outlets [4] [8]. That probe appears administrative/agency‑level rather than a criminal terrorism inquiry; reporting does not detail public findings from the SBA at this stage [4] [8]. Available sources do not mention SBA conclusions.
4. Congressional and oversight actions: House Oversight probe and political pressure
House GOP investigators, notably the Oversight Committee under Chairman James Comer, opened inquiries focused on state officials’ oversight of the fraud and requested documents from Governor Walz and Attorney General Ellison, framing the scandal as systemic and seeking federal record production [9]. These congressional actions are political and investigatory, not criminal findings, and they have set deadlines for documents and testimony [9]. Sources show these moves have been paired with sharp political messaging from the White House and GOP allies [10] [9].
5. What investigators have and have not found — facts cited by reporting
Federal prosecutors have secured dozens of criminal charges and guilty pleas in schemes that stole tens to hundreds of millions from pandemic relief and food‑assistance programs; DOJ described Feeding Our Future and affiliates as having stolen at least $240–$250 million in federal funds in reporting cited by outlets [5] [6]. By contrast, multiple federal investigators told CBS News and Reuters there is no publicly disclosed evidence so far that the stolen funds were routed to al‑Shabaab; Treasury’s announcement initiated a separate probe into that specific allegation, but reporting does not show Treasury has corroborated it [3] [2].
6. Competing narratives and political context — framing matters
The White House and federal Republicans have framed the story aggressively, describing Minnesota as a “hub of fraudulent money laundering activity” and alleging terror links; the White House published a strongly worded piece asserting a $1 billion+ toll and direct links to al‑Shabaab [10]. Local and national reporters, and some federal investigators, caution against broad community blame and note prosecutors so far focused on financial criminality rather than terrorism financing — officials say many defendants sought personal enrichment, not to fund foreign militancy [3] [1]. This divergence underscores political motives: congressional and White House probes intensify scrutiny and may press agencies to pursue aggressive lines of inquiry [9] [10].
7. Limits of current reporting and what to watch next
Available sources document criminal charges, administrative probes and high‑level Treasury and congressional inquiries, but they do not report a completed Treasury or DOJ finding that public funds definitively reached al‑Shabaab; nor do they show SBA or Treasury conclusions yet [2] [3] [4]. Key developments to monitor: any Treasury or DOJ public statements confirming terrorism‑financing links, results of Oversight Committee requests, and outcomes of ongoing criminal cases beyond guilty pleas and convictions already reported [2] [9] [1].
Limitations: this account uses only the supplied reporting and therefore cannot confirm developments outside those sources; where sources do not mention a claim, I note that gap rather than assert its falsity [7] [3].