What specific CBP or DHS reports were sent to the White House in the hours after the Minneapolis shooting, and are those reports public?
Executive summary
Within hours of the Minneapolis shooting that killed Alex Pretti, Customs and Border Protection’s internal, preliminary assessments — described in reporting as a CBP “preliminary review” or “death notification” prepared by the agency’s Office of Professional Responsibility — were circulated to Capitol Hill and used as the factual basis for early White House and DHS statements; those internal CBP documents were not formally published as agency‑wide public reports, though fragments or copies were subsequently obtained and cited by multiple news outlets [1] [2] [3].
1. What federal documents were generated and circulated immediately after the shooting
CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility produced a preliminary assessment (described variously as a “preliminary review,” a “preliminary report,” and a statutorily required “death notification” to congressional committees) that summarized body‑worn camera footage and CBP documentation about the incident and was sent to lawmakers within roughly 72 hours of the shooting [3] [1] [2]. Reporting also notes CBP personnel alerted senior White House and DHS officials by text and calls in real time — for example, Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino texted “Shots fired in Minneapolis” to top White House and DHS staff minutes after the incident — and those immediate operational messages fed into Washington’s initial public posture [4].
2. What the CBP preliminary review said, as reported
The CBP preliminary review, as summarized in multiple news accounts, records a timeline in which officers attempted to move Pretti and another person, a struggle ensued, an agent repeatedly shouted “He’s got a gun!”, and two agents discharged their CBP‑issued handguns about five seconds later; the review also records that an agent afterward said he had possession of Pretti’s firearm and secured it in his vehicle [3] [5] [1]. Several outlets emphasize the review did not corroborate earlier, stronger characterizations from DHS leadership — such as that Pretti had been “brandishing” a weapon or was attempting to “inflict maximum damage” — and in some respects the internal assessment undercut initial White House and DHS public claims [2] [1].
3. Who received these reports and how they shaped White House messaging
Congressional committees received the formal CBP death notification; in parallel, CBP operational messages and the preliminary review informed White House and DHS advisers’ rapid public statements, according to reporting quoting Stephen Miller and other administration officials who said Washington “worked from information provided by Customs and Border Protection” [4] [6]. That sequence — field reporting to CBP internal review to White House messaging — is central to why the White House later sought to blame CBP for the content of early statements [7] [6].
4. Are those reports public? — what has been released and what remains private
The CBP preliminary review itself was not issued as a full public CBP report in the immediate aftermath; instead, parts of it were shared with and obtained by media outlets and cited in news accounts, and members of Congress were formally notified under standard CBP protocol for deaths in custody [3] [8] [1]. Media reporting says the review was based on body‑worn camera footage and documentation, and outlets report that bodycam exists though release to the public remains unclear [9] [1]. Multiple reports emphasize gaps: the agency provided a factual summary to Congress and to senior officials, but CBP did not publish a full, public investigative report at the time, and DHS investigations (and whether DOJ civil‑rights review would follow) were still in progress [8] [10].
5. Limits of the public record and why that matters
Available reporting establishes that CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility produced a preliminary document that reached Congress and informed the White House, and that news outlets reviewed portions of that document; it also makes clear that a complete, formally published CBP or DHS investigative report for public release had not been posted to agency websites in the hours or days after the shooting, and the bodycam footage’s public release remained unresolved [2] [9] [1]. Those gaps matter because the precise wording, context, and any subsequent edits in the documents sent to the White House affect whether early public statements were accurate or overreaching — a point underscored by reporting that the internal review contradicted some senior DHS characterizations [2].