Minneapolis politicians describing ice as the gustapo?

1. Who said it and how often: high‑profile Minnesota voices drew the analogy

Governor Tim Walz is the most-cited Minnesota official to use the Gestapo comparison, telling audiences that Trump’s ICE was “scooping folks up off the streets,” language reported by several outlets ^{[1] [2]}, while other Democrats and local leaders—from members of Congress to mayors and activists—have likewise likened ICE tactics to secret police behavior in public statements and at protests ^{[6] [7] [8]}.

2. The context: shootings and community outrage gave fuel to dramatic rhetoric

The surge in Gestapo comparisons followed high‑profile, lethal encounters between federal agents and Minneapolis residents—incidents that spurred mass protests and a broader political debate over ICE’s tactics—an environment repeatedly referenced in reporting tying the rhetoric to the killings and subsequent demonstrations ^{[1] [9] [10]}.

3. Pushback from federal officials and ICE leadership framed the language as dangerous

Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino publicly criticized the Gestapo label at a Minneapolis press conference and warned that vilifying law enforcement carries consequences, an assertion reported after the local backlash and his subsequent departure from Minneapolis ^[4]. ICE’s acting director and Department of Homeland Security officials have condemned comparisons as “gross” and dehumanizing, arguing they endanger officers and that such rhetoric must stop ^{[11] [8]}.

4. Experts caution: analogy resonates but risks mis‑framing history and policy debates

Holocaust educators and scholars tell reporters the Gestapo analogy taps powerful public anxieties about state violence and secret police, but they also warn that equating a contemporary, statutory U.S. agency with Nazi-era state apparatus can oversimplify important legal and historical distinctions—points made clear in interviews and op-eds that stress both the resonance and the danger of such comparisons ^{[5] [3]}.

5. Political uses and counteruses: who benefits from the analogy?

Progressive politicians and activists use the Gestapo shorthand to dramatize perceived abuses and push for oversight, restrictions, or abolition of ICE, while federal officials and conservative voices portray the same language as reckless, citing it as evidence of “demonization” that fuels threats and violence against officers—an argument advanced in DHS messaging and White House statements that also cited spikes in attacks on ICE personnel ^{[12] [7] [8]}.

6. Where the debate intersects with accountability in court and media narratives

The rhetoric has not occurred in a vacuum: federal judges and courts in Minnesota have taken an unusually assertive posture toward ICE conduct, including ordering the agency’s acting director to answer in court amid allegations of extraordinary violations of orders—developments that reporters tie into the broader political and legal scrutiny of enforcement tactics ^[13]. Media coverage alternately amplifies dramatic analogies and features scholars and survivors who urge restraint and factual precision ^{[9] [3]}.

Conclusion: factual summary, not a verdict

It is accurate to say Minneapolis politicians and several national Democrats have described ICE using Gestapo language and that those comparisons have been widely reported, criticized by federal officials, and debated by historians and educators for both their rhetorical force and their pitfalls ^{[1] [4] [5] [3]}. Reporting shows the analogy is a political tool deployed amid real incidents of force and legal controversy, but scholars and some officials argue the comparison risks flattening complex differences between a modern, accountable agency and a genocidal regime ^{[3] [11]}.