ICE Continues to Remove the Worst of the Worst from Minneapolis Streets
Executive summary
The Department of Homeland Security and ICE have publicly touted large numbers of arrests in the Minneapolis Operation Metro Surge and released lists of detainees they describe as “the worst of the worst,” including people with prior convictions for homicide, robbery, sexual assault, weapons offenses and drug trafficking [1] [2]. At the same time, city and state leaders, community groups and national media have documented intense local backlash — lawsuits, mass protests and at least one high‑profile fatal shooting by a federal agent — that complicate any simple claim that the operation has straightforwardly improved public safety [3] Minnesotageneralstrike" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[4] [5] [6].
1. DHS’s framing: arrests, names and “worst of the worst”
Homeland Security communications have repeatedly emphasized arrest totals and individual criminal histories to justify the Minnesota deployment: DHS posted that ICE achieved roughly 3,000 arrests during the Metro Surge and public releases singled out named detainees with past convictions including homicide, robbery and aggravated assault [1] [2], while Secretary Kristi Noem and other officials have broadly characterized those hauled in as dangerous criminal aliens [1] [7]. DHS messaging also asserted larger aggregate figures in some venues — for example, an X post attributed to Secretary Noem noted “over 10,000” arrests in the broader claim around the operation — a figure reflected in reporting and summaries of official statements but questioned in public debate [7].
2. Federal resources and the scale of the operation
The surge brought thousands of federal personnel and extensive logistics: reporting noted plans for roughly 2,000 federal agents to operate in the region with a heavy contingent from ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, and internal planning documents and press reporting described substantial detention and transfer planning tied to the Minnesota effort [8] [9]. DHS briefings and follow‑up statements have made arrest totals a central metric for success, and federal officials held news conferences to present results and to defend continued deployments [10].
3. Local officials and communities push back
Minneapolis and Minnesota officials have mounted a legal and political challenge to the deployment, suing DHS and publicly demanding ICE’s withdrawal, arguing the federal presence is destabilizing, expensive for local police overtime and harmful to community safety and trust — claims the city and state have documented in press releases and statements [3] [11]. Local leaders, including Mayor Jacob Frey and Governor Tim Walz, have alleged racial profiling and reported that normal civic life was disrupted, contributing to school lockdowns and lost business revenue as residents reacted to aggressive enforcement tactics [3] [4].
4. Protests, strikes and a polarized public reaction
The operation provoked sustained street action: tens of thousands of protesters and a statewide general strike were reported as responses to ICE activity and to at least one fatal shooting by a federal officer, and businesses and labor groups closed in solidarity during mass demonstrations in subzero temperatures [4] [5] [12]. Media coverage and live updates tracked clashes between federal agents and community observers, and footage of confrontations circulated widely, feeding both local organizing and national debate [13] [14].
5. High‑profile incidents that complicate the narrative of safety
Public confidence in the operation’s net effects was shaken by high‑profile shootings involving federal agents: multiple reports connect ICE and other DHS officers to fatal or injurious shootings in Minneapolis, most notably the killing of Renee (Renée) Good and, later, Alex Pretti, incidents that spurred litigation, judicial orders to preserve evidence and intensified calls for accountability [7] [14] [4]. These events prompted additional scrutiny of tactics and a reassessment from critics about whether intensified enforcement made communities safer or more volatile [6].
6. What can be concluded from available reporting
From the sources available, DHS and ICE have indisputably portrayed the Metro Surge as removing individuals with criminal histories from Minneapolis streets and have released names and totals to support that narrative [1] [2]. Equally indisputable in the record is powerful local resistance — legal action, mass protests, criticism by elected officials and media investigations — and a string of volatile incidents, including shootings, that complicate or counter the administration’s safety argument [3] [5] [6]. Reporting does not settle long‑term effects on crime rates or community safety; those outcomes are not fully documented in the materials reviewed here, so definitive claims about net public‑safety benefits beyond the arrests and public disorder they produced remain unproven in these sources [1] [3].