Did Minneapolis police join border patrol
Executive summary
There is no credible reporting that Minneapolis police “joined” or became part of Border Patrol operations; federal Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents were deployed to Minneapolis in large numbers and operated as a separate federal force, while Minneapolis police remained a distinct local agency that sometimes conflicted with or criticized the federal presence [1] [2] [3]. Coverage instead documents parallel deployments, confrontations between protesters and federal agents, and local officials urging federal forces to leave rather than collaborating with them [4] [5].
1. Federal agents — large, visible, and separate from city police
Multiple outlets report that the Department of Homeland Security sent thousands of immigration-enforcement personnel to the Minneapolis area — including ICE, CBP and Border Patrol officers — as part of a surge that officials described as among the largest in DHS history, and these federal teams were plainly identified in media coverage as federal actors, not local police [2] [1] [6]. Independent reporting and visual evidence, including investigations of specific Border Patrol tactical officers, show federal uniforms, unit patches (BORTAC), tactical leadership such as Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino, and the use of federal less‑lethal munitions, all indicating a federal chain of command distinct from Minneapolis Police Department [7] [8].
2. What Minneapolis police actually did — distinct orders, criticism, and limited intervention
Local officials and the Minneapolis Police Department did not sign on to federal operations; instead, MPD leadership publicly criticized federal tactics, warned officers not to tolerate unlawful force by ICE, and in at least one instance issued a dispersal order and said they made no arrests while a crowd dispersed — actions consistent with a separate municipal response rather than a joint enforcement operation [9] [8]. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara explicitly warned city officers to intervene if they observed unlawful force by ICE or Border Patrol, and city leaders have urged federal actors to leave the city, showing institutional distance rather than partnership [9] [5].
3. Where the “joined” narrative likely came from — proximity, mixed uniforms, and chaotic scenes
Confusion has been fueled by images and videos of federal agents operating in Minneapolis neighborhoods and by scenes where federal officers gave orders or used crowd-control measures that local people said looked like policing, which can create the impression of one blended force on the street; reporters and analysts note the deployment included a patchwork of agencies (ICE, CBP, Federal Bureau of Prisons) with different tactics, and that limited coordination and overlapping roles in an urban environment created chaos and public misunderstanding [3] [4]. High-profile moments — such as Border Patrol leadership visibly at protest lines and federal agents firing tear gas or less-lethal rounds — amplified perceptions that local police and Border Patrol were acting as a single unit, even though reporting attributes those actions to federal agents [10] [7].
4. Legal, institutional and political context that matters
The federal surge has prompted lawsuits and judicial scrutiny, including a federal judge ruling limiting certain federal tactics against peaceful protesters, and city and state officials have filed suits arguing the deployments overreach constitutional limits — all signs of institutional friction rather than integration between Minneapolis police and Border Patrol [11] [1]. Governor and municipal responses — such as mobilizing the National Guard and public condemnations — further illustrate competing authorities on the ground, not a unified, joint enforcement posture [8] [6].
5. Bottom line and limitations in the reporting
Based on the available reporting, Minneapolis police did not “join” Border Patrol; federal CBP/ICE forces operated in the city separately and sometimes in opposition to local leaders and MPD directives [2] [9]. Reporting does document interactions, overlapping presence at protests, and moments of operational confusion that have stoked claims of collaboration, but none of the cited coverage shows a formal deputization or merger of MPD into Border Patrol; if the user seeks legally binding documents or chain‑of‑command orders proving such a merger, those are not present in the available sources [3] [1].