A growing controversy in Minnesota is raising serious questions about whether state officials are preparing to interfere with federal immigration enforcement under President Donald Trump — and whether local police could one day be ordered to arrest ICE agents simply for doing their jobs.
The debate erupted on MS NOW’s The Weekend when host Eugene Daniels asked Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison a jaw-dropping question: Is there a scenario where state police arrest ICE officers for “excessive force”?
The exchange immediately ignited nationwide concern among conservatives who already view Minnesota’s Democrat leadership as openly hostile to law-and-order priorities — especially when it comes to securing the border and removing criminal illegal immigrants.
Police Chief Issues Warning: Intervene Against ICE or Get Fired
The controversy began after Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara issued a strict warning to his department: If officers witness “unlawful force” by any law enforcement official — including federal immigration agents — they are expected to intervene or face termination.
O’Hara’s comments came after reports of ICE operations in the state, and his threat quickly raised alarms about potential confrontations between local police and federal teams working to enforce Trump’s strengthened immigration policies.
Host Eugene Daniels pressed the issue, noting that most Americans would have a hard time imagining local officers stepping in to challenge ICE agents during active enforcement operations.
Ellison’s Explanation Raises Even More Questions
Minnesota Attorney General Ellison attempted to downplay the situation, framing the chief’s order as a routine reminder that police must intervene when witnessing illegal conduct.
“All he’s saying is that officers must step in if any colleague — federal or local — is acting unlawfully,” Ellison claimed.
He argued the principle was no different than stopping an officer from stealing evidence or abusing a suspect.
But Daniels pushed back with the real question on viewers’ minds: “So should local police actually arrest ICE agents if they believe excessive force is being used?”
Ellison dodged the yes-or-no answer, instead saying he hoped O’Hara’s warning would “prevent” such a confrontation from ever taking place.
He added that the message was meant to ensure ICE agents “observe the requirements of the law,” signaling that Minnesota officials are ready to scrutinize federal immigration actions more aggressively than ever.
A Direct Clash With Trump’s Immigration Agenda?
For many conservative Americans — especially older audiences who prioritize border security, national sovereignty, and law-and-order — the implications are troubling:
- Could a blue-state attorney general undermine federal immigration authority?
- Would local police be punished for refusing to interfere with ICE operations?
- Is Minnesota preparing to criminalize the very agents enforcing Trump’s border policies?
With illegal immigration now a top national concern, Ellison’s remarks add new fuel to the debate over whether Democrat-led states are intentionally obstructing federal law.
If Minnesota officials are hinting at a willingness to confront or even detain federal agents, it could set the stage for one of the most explosive constitutional showdowns of Trump’s second term.
Bottom Line: Minnesota Sends a Dire Warning to ICE
Ellison insists the goal is “prevention,” but his statements suggest Minnesota’s leadership is prepared to challenge federal immigration enforcement in unprecedented ways.
For millions of Americans frustrated with rising crime, border chaos, and weak local leadership, this development raises a powerful question: When federal agents are targeted instead of the criminals they’re trying to stop, whose side are Minnesota officials really on?