Minnesota sues Trump administration over shootings, including deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty speaks during a news conference at the Hennepin County Government Center on Aug. 14, 2025, in Minneapolis. (Renée Jones Schneider/Star Tribune via AP, File)

WASHINGTON — Minnesota officials sued the Trump administration on Tuesday for access to evidence they say they need to independently investigate three shootings by federal officers, including the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

The lawsuit claims that the federal government reneged on its promise to cooperate with state investigations after the surge of federal law enforcement in Minneapolis. State officials are seeking a court order demanding that the Trump administration comply.

“We are prepared to fight for transparency and accountability that the federal government is desperate to avoid,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty told reporters.

The lawsuit marks an escalation in the clash between Minnesota leaders and the Trump administration over the investigations into the high-profile shootings by federal officers that sparked public outcry and protests. The Trump administration has suggested that Minnesota officials don’t have jurisdiction to investigate, but state officials insist they need to conduct their own probes because they don’t trust the federal government to investigate itself.

“There has to be an investigation any time a federal agent or a state agent takes the life of a person in our community,” Moriarty said.

The administration sent thousands of officers to the Minneapolis and St. Paul area for the immigration crackdown as part of President Donald Trump’s national deportation campaign. The Department of Homeland Security considered its largest immigration enforcement operation ever a success but it was staunchly criticized by Minnesota’s leaders who raised questions over officers’ conduct.

There continues to be fallout from Operation Metro Surge in the form of a Homeland Security shutdown, as Democrats in Congress hold up funding in an effort to secure restraints on Trump’s immigration agenda.

An email seeking comment was sent to Justice Department. A DHS spokesperson said in an email Tuesday that all shootings are reviewed by an appropriate law enforcement agency, followed by an independent review within the agency.

The Justice Department in January said it was opening a federal civil rights investigation into Pretti’s killing but has said a similar federal probe was not warranted in the killing of Good. The decision in Good’s case marked a sharp departure from past administrations, which moved quickly to investigate shootings of civilians by law enforcement officials for potential civil rights offenses.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has said that the department’s Civil Rights Division does not investigate every law enforcement shooting and that there have to be circumstances and facts that “warrant an investigation.”

DHS said Tuesday that Customs and Border Patrol is conducting its own internal investigation of the Pretti case. On Good, DHS said the matter remains under investigation but that footage shows Good impeded law enforcement operations and weaponized her vehicle, leading the officer to act in self-defense.

Minnesota’s lawsuit also demands access to evidence in a third case -- that of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, who was shot and wounded in his right thigh by a federal agent in January.

Federal officials initially accused Sosa-Celis and another man of beating an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel. But federal prosecutors later dropped all charges against the men, and authorities opened a criminal investigation into whether two immigration officers lied under oath about the shooting.

Both officers are on administrative leave as ICE and DOJ conduct a joint review, DHS said Tuesday, adding in a statement that ICE is committed to transparency and accountability.

Minnesota’s lawsuit said the federal government is not permitted to “withhold investigative evidence for the purpose of shielding law enforcement officers from scrutiny where a State is investigating serious potential violations of its criminal laws, targeting its citizens, within its borders.”

Moriarty said Tuesday that the federal government “has adopted a policy of categorically withholding evidence,” calling the practice unprecedented and alarming. She said the lawsuit followed formal demands for evidence after the federal government blocked Minnesota investigators from accessing evidence related to the shootings.

Such cases by states against the federal government are highly unusual, said Rachel Moran, law professor at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis.

That is because local agencies don’t often try to investigate potential crimes by federal officers, and also because the federal government rarely refuses to cooperate. The opposite, where state officials might try to obstruct federal agents, used to be more common during the civil rights era, Moran said.

The state should have a chance at success because, what their basic claim is, is that they have a right to review evidence regarding a possible crime,” Moran said. “They have not only a right, but an obligation to investigate whether officers have committed crimes in their jurisdiction.”

Either outcome of the lawsuit could have significant implications for federal and state power. If a federal judge grants the state’s request, Moran said, that provides legal support for state and local officials to investigate federal officers. If the federal government is allowed to withhold evidence, it could discourage federal and state cooperation, she said.

Fingerhut reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

Hannah Fingerhut And Alanna Durkin Richer, The Associated Press