What official DHS or FBI documents have been released about Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis?

1. DHS’ public output: repetitive press releases framing results

Since the operation began, DHS and its components have repeatedly issued public press releases that enumerate arrests, label those arrested as the “worst of the worst,” and highlight individual categories (pedophiles, gang members, rapists, fraudsters) and arrest tallies; examples include multiple DHS/ICE releases from December 2025 through January 2026 that list specific arrests and claim thousands detained during the surge ^{[1] [2] [5] [6]}.

2. DHS announcements expanding and branding the operation

DHS also released formal announcements describing the scope and expansion of the campaign — including a public assertion that up to 2,000 federal agents were being sent to the Minneapolis–Saint Paul area and statements positioning the surge as the largest interior enforcement action in the department’s recent history — language that has been quoted widely in news coverage and in DHS materials summarized by media outlets ^{[7] [8] [4]}.

3. FBI involvement acknowledged but public FBI documents scarce in reporting

Reporting indicates FBI personnel and leadership have been involved operationally or in support roles — FBI Director Kash Patel is reported to have announced intensification of federal activity and to have described FBI support for investigations tied to the surge — yet the sources do not point to a public release by the FBI of underlying documents (for example, investigative reports or prosecutorial filings) that would comprehensively document the bureau’s role ^{[8] [9] [3]}.

4. One “affidavit” referenced but not produced in the public record cited here

Several accounts reference an “FBI affidavit” in the context of specific incidents tied to the operation (for instance, disputes over who was present at a shooting scene), and Wikipedia cites that a third man alleged in some narratives was not mentioned in an FBI affidavit — however, the supplied reporting does not include the affidavit itself nor a link to a publicly released FBI affidavit for independent inspection ^[7].

5. Investigative and prosecutorial documents in local litigation and reporting

Court filings by Minnesota and its cities challenging Operation Metro Surge are referenced in the press — those filings cite federal letters and administrative actions and demand production or response from federal agencies — but the reporting indicates those materials are being litigated and contested rather than fully posted as standalone DHS/FBI releases in the public domain referenced here ^{[4] [10]}.

6. What is not shown in the sources: limited publicly posted FBI records, and contested access to scenes

The assembled sources make clear DHS has disseminated a steady stream of public statements and arrest tallies, and that the FBI has been publicly acknowledged as participating in investigations, yet the provided reporting does not point to a trove of released FBI documents (investigative reports, affidavits, or internal memoranda) made available to the public; meanwhile, reporting also notes disputes over scene access (the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension saying DHS blocked it) and ongoing probes led by Homeland Security Investigations with FBI support ^{[3] [9]}.

7. Competing narratives and incentives around what was released

DHS releases have a clear framing incentive: to justify the operation by cataloguing arrests and emphasizing dangerous individuals allegedly removed from streets (DHS press releases repeatedly use that framing), while critics — including state and municipal plaintiffs and civil‑liberties groups cited in reporting — argue the administration is using the operation for political retribution and that the public record is incomplete or biased; the sources show this contest over narrative and evidence, and that some requested or referenced FBI materials are discussed in reporting or litigation without being fully published in the cited material ^{[1] [4] [10]}.