By Greg Stejskal

In December 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security launched what they described as the largest DHS immigration enforcement operation ever conducted. It primarily targeted the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area and was dubbed “Operation Metro Surge.”

Shooting of Renee Good

It did not target specific individuals, “the worse of the worst,” but was rather a mass roundup of what was believed to be undocumented immigrants, not necessarily based on probable cause or even reasonable suspicion.

There were large demonstrations protesting the operation and groups of protestors were often present during the operation. Two protestors both U.S. citizens were shot and killed by ICE agents. There was also a Venezuelan who was shot and wounded by an ICE agent.

Ordinarily the Department of Justice/FBI would investigate shooting incidents under these circumstances.

Historical Perspective

Before I discuss DOJ/FBI response to the Minnesota shootings, I want to provide some historical perspective.

At the end of the Civil War slavery was abolished and in the South Reconstruction began. During the Grant administration, DOJ was initially established to prosecute laws that were passed pursuant to the 14^th Amendment, which assures that no state deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

As a reaction to Reconstruction, White southerners formed chapters of the Ku Klux Klan that terrorized and murdered emancipated slaves to dissuade them from exercising their rights guaranteed under the 14^th Amendment.

The DOJ aggressively and successfully prosecuted the KKK and obtained thousands of indictments and convictions. (The DOJ was “weaponized” against the KKK.) Enforcement was aided by the then occupying U.S. Army. There was no FBI then.

In 1908 the FBI was formed to provide a dedicated investigative arm of the DOJ. It was originally named the Division of Investigation and was relatively ineffectual.

J. Edgar Hoover (FBI photo)

It wasn’t until 1924 when J. Edgar Hoover became director that the DOI began to develop into the FBI we know today. (DOI was renamed the FBI in 1935.) Director Hoover set high professional standards for hiring agents and conducting investigations. He embraced the use of scientific forensics and championed a national repository for criminal fingerprints which became the National Crime Information Center.

The FBI earned the esteem and trust of the American people through the success it has had investigating cases and providing cooperation and services to other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. The FBI’s record isn’t perfect, but as an agency it has striven to pursue justice and the rule of law without fear or favor. This is the FBI I was proud to be part of for 31+ years.

So, it is disheartening to see what has occurred since January 20^th, 2025, within the DOJ and FBI. The DOJ/FBI response to the ICE shootings in Minnesota are examples of their abdication of the pursuit of justice.

The Minnesota ICE Shootings

Hennepin County Prosecutor Mary Moriarty

On May 29^th, the Minnesota Hennepin County Prosecutor Mary Moriarty announced that Christian J. Castro, an ICE agent, was arrested in Texas by Texas authorities. Castro was charged in Minnesota with four felony counts of 2^nd degree assault and one misdemeanor count of falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 shooting of Julio C. Sosa-Celis, who is from Venezuela.  He was shot in the leg and treated at the hospital. 

Castro is being detained in Texas and has not waived extradition. Prosecutor Moriarty said, “His (Castro’s) federal badge does not make him immune from state charges for criminal conduct in Minnesota.”

It is, however, complicated.

There is a Constitutional doctrine of “Supremacy Clause Immunity.” This limited immunity prevents states from prosecuting federal agents for actions that were reasonably necessary and proper to perform their lawful duties. Agents are generally immune if they act within the scope of their federal authority and had an objectively reasonable belief that their conduct was necessary to carry out their federal duties.

Federal agents can still be charged with and convicted of state crimes such as homicide or assault if the agents act outside their official duties, behave egregiously, or use unreasonable and unlawful force. Supremacy Clause immunity does not apply to federal charges.

Despite what Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and others have said ICE agents do not have complete immunity from state prosecution.

Castro’s Charges

Castro’s charges relate to an incident in which Castro alleged that he had been assaulted with a shovel by the Venezuelan immigrant, Sosa-Celis, who he was pursuing on foot. Castro claimed that in self-defense, he shot the immigrant, wounding him in the leg. At the time, then-head of the DHS, Kristi Noem, described it as “an attempted murder of federal law enforcement.” 

However, a surveillance camera recording of the incident indicates that Castro was never assaulted, and Castro shot the immigrant as he fled into a house. To best of my knowledge there was no federal investigation of this incident.

The immigrant was arrested and charged with assault. That charge was dismissed, and it was determined that he was legally in the U.S.

Castro, if extradited to Minnesota for prosecution, does have the “right of removal,” which means he. has  a statutory right to move his case from Minnesota state court to federal court where a federal judge would preside and would decide whether an immunity claim was valid.

A Minnesota attorney would still prosecute the state charges but before the federal judge in federal court. If there’s a conviction, it would not be subject to a presidential pardon because it would be a state, not a federal conviction.

From the outset this case should have been investigated by the Minnesota authorities with the FBI as they have collateral jurisdiction. This is also how the ICE fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti should have been investigated.

In both the Good and Pretti shootings there were multiple video recordings from different angles. The video recordings have been made public and would seem to at least make a prima facia case that the ICE agents acted “egregiously and used unreasonable and unlawful force.”

The ICE agents arguably have a valid self-defense claim. Still, we’ll never see what justice looks like since there’s no transparency on the part of the government.  

Immediate Threat of Life

The author of the article, Greg Stejskal

“Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife.” Brown v. US (1921) This quote from the opinion of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. means the law cannot expect calm, rational decision-making from someone reacting to an immediate threat to their life. Whether that rational applies in these shootings should be decided in a court of law not by investigators who have done cursory or no investigation.

Reportedly there was some investigation by the FBI in the Good and Pretti shootings, but no report has been produced, and the FBI has refused to share any evidence collected with the Minnesota authorities who have formally requested it. This would seem to be tantamount to obstruction of justice – a coverup.

The Trump administration has learned that if no investigation is conducted, it can essentially pull off a passive coverup.

Former AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash (FBI photo)

Trump’s Former Attorney General Pam Bondi did not authorize an FBI investigation into the two Minnesota shootings and indicated she thought that the ICE agents acted lawfully.

Instead, an investigation was opened to determine whether Renee Good or her spouse had any ties to radical left organizations — as if this would justify her being killed. Those investigative decisions resulted in the resignation in protest of several career assistant U.S. attorneys in the Minnesota DOJ office and an FBI supervisor.

FBI Director Kash Patel, who shows no signs of independence from the White House, seems to be averse to conducting any investigations that might reflect negatively on the Trump administration.

But he is willing to push retributive investigations targeting “enemies of Trump” to include “threats” made using seashells.

By Steve Neavling

Former Attorney General Pam Bondi told lawmakers that Todd Blanche, President Trump’s pick to lead the Justice Department, oversaw the agency’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files while serving as deputy attorney general, Politico reports.

Bondi made the remarks during a closed-door interview last month with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee as part of its Epstein investigation, according to a transcript released Thursday. She repeatedly said Blanche was responsible for the process and said “Blanche supervised [the] entire process” to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the Justice Department to release materials in the case.

“He was leading the Epstein matter and the release of everything from the beginning,” Bondi said, according to the transcript.

She also told lawmakers that any training for employees completing redactions would have been overseen by Blanche and that he was responsible for deciding whether documents were privileged.

The disclosure comes a day after Trump announced he plans to nominate Blanche to replace Bondi, whom he fired in April. Blanche is already facing scrutiny over the Justice Department’s now-abandoned plan to create a $1.8 billion fund for people who claim they were victims of “lawfare.”

Bondi was subpoenaed in March after five House Republicans joined Democrats to force her testimony over the administration’s handling of the Epstein files. Democrats on the committee quickly argued that Bondi’s comments show lawmakers need to hear from Blanche, raising the possibility of another subpoena fight as his confirmation prospects remain uncertain.

By Steve Neavling

Senate Republicans narrowly passed a $70 billion immigration enforcement bill early Friday, giving President Trump a major win as he pushes to expand his crackdown through the rest of his term, The New York Times reports.

The measure passed 52-47 and now heads to the House, where Republican leaders were expected to move quickly. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to vote against the bill, joining all Democrats.

The vote capped a long and bitter session in which Democrats forced Republicans to take public positions on several controversial Trump priorities, including a proposed $1.8 billion fund for people who claim they were targeted by the government, $1 billion for a White House ballroom project and Trump’s decision to name Housing Secretary Bill Pulte as the nation’s top intelligence official.

Although Republicans largely backed the immigration funding, some had raised concerns about Trump’s push for the payout fund and ballroom money. Critics feared the fund could be used to compensate Trump supporters involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

In the end, Republicans defeated bipartisan attempts to restrict or block the payout fund and used a filibuster-proof budget bill to push through years of funding for ICE and CBP. Democrats opposed the bill, arguing that any new immigration money should come with limits on federal agents’ tactics and conduct.

By Steve Neavling

Former Rep. George Santos may be facing new legal scrutiny after the prediction market company Kalshi alerted federal authorities about bets he allegedly placed on whether he would attend President Trump’s State of the Union address, NBC News reports.

Kalshi notified the Justice Department about the betting activity and also alerted the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, according to sources cited by NBC News. The company reportedly flagged bets Santos placed related to his attendance at Trump’s February speech.

Santos had told his followers on X that he planned to attend the address.

“I’m gonna be in the gallery,” Santos said in a video.

But he did not attend, and Kalshi detected that Santos had placed bets against his own attendance, according to one source.

Santos did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but he acknowledged Thursday on X that “the DOJ might be looking into me.”

He added, “I will comment further when appropriate and clarify everything accordingly while being mindful and respectful of any process that might be underway.”

“The bases of the accusation is preposterous and I look forward to supplying any information asked of me to any agency that inquires, till then media please do not inquire,” Santos wrote.

The Justice Department did not immediately comment, and it was unclear whether it had opened a formal investigation.

By Steve Neavling

President Trump said Wednesday night that he will nominate acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to permanently lead the Justice Department, elevating a former personal attorney who has moved quickly to show loyalty to the president, NBC News reports.

Trump announced the decision during a private White House event in the Rose Garden, according to a video posted by White House deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino. “He’s acting attorney general,” Trump said, referring to Blanche. “Tomorrow I’m instructing Dan and everybody else that’s involved in that very complicated process, which is going to be, I think, very quickly, that we are going to make him permanent attorney general.”

Blanche became acting attorney general in early April after Trump fired Pam Bondi. Since then, Blanche has pursued cases against Trump’s perceived enemies and backed a proposed $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to compensate people who say they were targeted by the federal government. The White House later dropped the idea after bipartisan criticism, with Blanche telling lawmakers Tuesday that the administration would not move forward with it.

Under Blanche, the Justice Department secured an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey over a photo of seashells arranged to show “86 47,” which the administration said amounted to a threat against Trump. Comey has denied threatening Trump.

Blanche previously served as Trump’s personal lawyer and represented him in the New York hush money case that ended with Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts. Trump has denied the charges. Blanche’s nomination now goes to the Senate, which confirmed him as deputy attorney general last year in a 52-46 vote.

By Steve Neavling

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin refused Tuesday to say clearly whether the Department of Homeland Security would follow court rulings under his leadership, accusing some federal judges of issuing politically motivated decisions, The Washington Post reports.

The comments came during a tense exchange with Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, at a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing. Mullin repeatedly said he would not violate the Constitution but argued some judges “make a political opinion from the bench” because they believe they are above the law.

“That’s why we see lower courts overturned by higher courts constantly,” Mullin said.

Murphy pressed Mullin about a Politico report that found federal judges had ruled in more than 10,000 cases that immigration officers illegally detained migrants without giving them a chance to plead their cases. Asked whether DHS would obey a court order, Mullin replied, “If we didn’t think the courts were politicized, I would be able to answer that. But we see courts over and over again that use their bench for their political opinion, not just the rule of law.”

Murphy warned that lawmakers in both parties should be alarmed by Mullin’s refusal to answer directly.

“If you’re a Republican or Democrat on this committee, you should be really, really freaked out,” Murphy said.

Mullin pushed back, saying, “We should be really concerned about rulings that come out of the courts and how often they get overturned.”

The hearing was the first of two days of congressional testimony for Mullin over a proposed $70 billion increase in DHS funding in a broader Republican spending plan. Democrats oppose the proposal, which also faces challenges among Republicans. Mullin is expected to appear Wednesday before the House Committee on Homeland Security.

By Steve Neavling

Former FBI officials have formed a support network for employees who say they are under pressure as FBI Director Kash Patel purges agents and staff accused of political bias, CNN reports.

The FBI Support Network will provide legal help, mental health services and job assistance for employees who want to leave the bureau, according to a release announcing the group. Former Assistant Special Agent in Charge Mike Feinberg said the goal is “to offer tangible assistance” to agents still inside the FBI.

The group is part of Justice Connection, which has been helping Justice Department employees. Organizers say they are building “an army of former FBI officials who want to assist those inside.”

Patel has fired agents who worked on investigations involving President Donald Trump, agents seen kneeling during protests over George Floyd’s death and others, including Brian Driscoll, who briefly led the FBI before Patel was sworn in.

Driscoll, who is suing over his termination, said in a video announcing the group that agents “facing these unprecedented times are not alone.” He said it was time to help “the special agents, intelligence analysts and the professional staff who are under attack.”

The Trump administration appears to be retreating from a nearly $1.8 billion payout fund that drew criticism from Democrats and unease among Republicans, who warned it could look like a taxpayer-funded reward for the president’s supporters, The Washington Post reports.

The Justice Department said Monday it would comply with a judge’s order temporarily blocking the fund. Although the department had little choice but to follow the order, the announcement was widely viewed by lawmakers as a sign that the White House may be backing away from the plan.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Florida, said the White House told him Monday it was dropping the fund. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, said he had urged the administration for days to shut it down.

“I do think that the best way to handle it is if the administration decides to shut it down themselves,” Thune told reporters.

Ideally, he added, the administration would also make clear it would not try to revive the fund.

Democrats said they want a firmer commitment that the fund is dead.

“Trump is claiming that the slush fund is dead for now, but Democrats will not stop until it’s well and truly buried,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said. “It can never see the light of day.”

The fund had alarmed members of both parties since it surfaced May 18, with critics warning that it could benefit people who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol or others who claimed the Biden administration had “weaponized” the Justice Department against them. Republicans also worried it could create new political problems ahead of the midterm elections.

Rosario “Pete” Vasquez, a longtime U.S. Border Patrol official with more than 26 years of experience, has been named chief of the agency, CBP announced Monday.

Vasquez most recently led the Border Patrol’s Blaine Sector in Washington state, overseeing border security operations along the northern border and working with federal, state, local, tribal, and international partners. His previous assignments included posts along the southwest and northern borders, CBP headquarters and international locations.

“Pete Vasquez is a Border Patrol agent’s agent,” CBP Commissioner Rodney S. Scott said. “He has spent more than two decades leading from the front, earning the respect of the workforce, and delivering results in some of the most challenging operational environments in the country. He understands what this mission demands because he has lived it. There is no one better suited to lead the United States Border Patrol into its next chapter.”

As chief, Vasquez will oversee nearly 20,000 agents and professional staff across the country. CBP said he will lead efforts to combat transnational criminal organizations, human smuggling and drug trafficking while protecting U.S. borders.

“It is the honor of a lifetime to serve as chief of the United States Border Patrol, and I’m grateful for the trust placed in me by President Trump, Secretary Mullin, and Commissioner Scott,” Vasquez said. “Our agents have never backed down from a challenge, and neither will I. As chief, my focus is clear: support our agents, strengthen our operational capabilities, and ensure the U.S. Border Patrol remains the most effective border security force in the world.”

By Steve Neavling

The prosecutor leading the federal case against former FBI Director James Comey has been replaced, according to a court filing made Friday evening, the Guardian reports.

The Justice Department notified the court that Matthew Petracca, a prosecutor with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina, is no longer handling the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Severo has taken over.

The filing did not explain the change, and a Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to the Guardian’s request for comment.

Comey was indicted in North Carolina in April 2026 over a photo he posted last year showing seashells arranged to read “86 47.” Prosecutors say the image amounted to a threat against President Trump, the nation’s 47th president. Comey faces two counts, including threatening the president and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce. If convicted, he could face up to 10 years in prison.

Comey denied wrongdoing in a video posted to his Substack after the indictment.

“Well, they’re back,” he said. “This time, about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. And this won’t be the end of it, but nothing has changed with me. I am still innocent. I am still not afraid. And I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So, let’s go.”

The charges came months after a separate effort to prosecute Comey over allegations that he lied to Congress collapsed. A federal judge in Virginia dismissed that indictment, ruling that the prosecutor overseeing the case had been wrongfully appointed.