Personnel shuffles, not policy shifts in Minnesota

Trump’s not ditching the authoritarian playbook

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem addresses the shooting death of Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minnesota. Photo by Olivier Douliery/Abaca/Sipa USA (Sipa via AP Images).

President Trump’s decision to distance himself from Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino regarding their roles overseeing ICE operations in Minnesota is a positive development, but we must be clear-eyed about the ongoing threat.

Trump is making a tactical retreat amid mounting public pressure.

Responding to the backlash over the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti and smearing of both victims as “domestic terrorists,” Trump touted phone calls with Governor Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey, claiming they were on a “similar wavelength” and agreeing to “look into” reducing the number of agents on the ground in Minnesota. Bovino has reportedly been demoted and sent back to his post in California.

But we should have no illusions: Personnel shuffles are not meaningful policy shifts. “Border Czar” Tom Homan, who is taking over operations in Minnesota and reporting directly to Trump, is also an extreme figure who has championed the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to allow ICE to wrongly deport people without due process and has also said, without evidence, that Good could be guilty of “terrorism.”

Noem, Bovino, Homan, and advisors like Stephen Miller, who referred to Pretti as a “would-be assassin,” are not outliers giving the president bad advice. They are appointees and employees following his directives.

Authoritarians, and those who have enabled them, throughout history have relied on the same tactic: defining the “other” as an existential threat to justify the consolidation of power. They do this to manufacture a cover for illegitimate force and takeovers. So, while many want to believe Trump is adopting a “new tone,” far more meaningful change is required.

The policy architecture that the administration has built to exploit immigration concerns, deploy federal agents, sideline critics, and tilt the electoral playing field in its favor is still fully intact. Especially in Minnesota.

A threat from the top and a politicized DOJ

The core authoritarian threat doesn’t come from Trump’s appointees; it comes from the top. As Bovino said in an interview regarding controversial federal action in Chicago, “Well, definitely, I mean, I take my orders from the executive branch, whether that’s President Trump or Secretary Noem.” The rearrangement of employees doesn’t alter where the power and the authoritarian impulse actually reside: with the president himself.

We are in this dire situation because Trump has been deploying thousands of DHS agents to American cities based on the false narrative, codified in a day-one executive order, that the United States is being “invaded” by criminals committing heinous acts against Americans and engaging in espionage and terror. And, of course, Trump continues to insist that non-citizen voting is the reason why he lost the 2020 election.

In his second term, Trump has issued more orders describing critics of his policies as “terrorists” and calling on his agencies to investigate them as such. Which the Department of Justice is doing. And when protests erupted across the country in response to his extreme policies, particularly when it comes to his immigration overreaches, he dispatched more federal agents and National Guard troops to quell his critics.

Beginning in December, the administration launched Operation Metro Surge, which officials called “the largest deportation operation ever.” And as we’ve learned, Trump’s immigration crackdowns are free speech crackdowns, too. Both Good and Pretti were exercising their right to observe federal agents and were unjustifiably killed in the course of doing so.

Read more: Free speech, ICE, and free elections in 2026.

Rather than ensuring accountability for the misuse of federal power or the killings of civilians, the administration has turned the Justice Department outward, using it as leverage against political opponents and dissenting states. And Attorney General Pam Bondi, a primary enforcer of Trump’s agenda, is comfortably ensconced in her position.

She is carrying out the president’s desire to target critics and is also investigating Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and local leaders for the “crime” of opposing the administration’s tactics with their First Amendment-protected speech. And on the very day federal agents killed Alex Pretti, Bondi connected the DHS deployment to the elections.

Read more: The DOJ investigation of Minnesota officials, explained.

In a Jan. 24 letter to Governor Walz that the Minnesota attorney general called a “ransom note,” she demanded that Walz “restore rule of law, support ICE officers, and bring an end to the chaos in Minnesota” with what she described as “common sense solutions,” which included the surrender of unredacted voter rolls.

The Constitution gives states, not the federal government, the power to run elections, and the administration has no legal authority to control elections or to demand state voter rolls. Moreover, this demand has no plausible public safety justification. It does, however, provide the federal government with tools to intimidate political opponents, target communities, and manipulate the conditions under which future elections are conducted.

Read more: Election deniers want your data.

In moments like this, the Justice Department should be asking hard questions about the conduct of federal officers and the chain of command that authorized their actions. Instead, it has become a shield for power and a weapon against those who challenge it.

Administration officials leapt to the defense of the federal officer involved in the killings of Good and Pretti and smeared their victims. None of the officers has faced meaningful discipline, let alone criminal charges, and there is no prospect that this administration will conduct a legitimate federal investigation that could result in prosecution, as would ordinarily be the case in the event of the unjustified killing of a civilian.

Federal authorities have also refused to cooperate with state investigators, again, as would ordinarily be routine, making it much harder for state law enforcement to conduct its own investigation. Alarmingly, Vice President JD Vance has claimed that agents who use lethal force enjoy “absolute immunity.” Contrary to Vance’s claims, federal officers do not have absolute immunity and can be charged with state crimes in some instances.

Read more about pathways to accountability: How to stop ICE’s brutality and impunity.

A responsible DOJ would be investigating and considering federal charges. But under Trump, Jan. 6-style violence carried out in service of his agenda continues to be pardoned, excused, defended, and normalized.

The personnel shuffles in Minnesota are not meaningful policy shifts

The authoritarian project Trump continues to pursue is not defined by individual officials, but by his approach. An approach that’s evident in the deployment of federal power based on demonstrably false narratives, in the weaponization of government institutions against critics, and in the extraordinary leniency extended to those who commit violence in service of that agenda.

All three factors remain present in Minnesota today. And while Trump’s entrenchment agenda is dangerous, it is not inevitable or undefeatable. By standing firm, Minnesota is forcing an opening that must now be used to build toward the larger goal: the dismantling of the authoritarian architecture that produced the crisis in the first place.