Chaos Reigns as Immigration Enforcement Looms Over Minneapolis Elections
In a scene reminiscent of a political thriller, immigration enforcement is creating a maelstrom in Minneapolis and beyond, with Democrats, election officials, and civil rights advocates expressing grave concerns about the potential disruption to the upcoming November elections. Their alarm bells are ringing over the prospect that recent deployments of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents could serve as a tool for voter suppression, particularly if these armed officers conduct raids in proximity to polling stations, potentially frightening citizens into abstaining from voting.
“Look at what’s unfolding: Trump appears to be crafting a pretext to manipulate the election,” asserted Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “It stands to reason that this private police force he’s assembling may be strategically employed to suppress voter turnout.”
In a bid to counteract this perceived threat, Senate Democrats contemplated a proposal to prohibit ICE agents from polling sites during negotiations over the Homeland Security funding bill. However, as reported by both Murphy and Senator Gary Peters (D-Mich.), this crucial policy was ultimately excluded from the final list of demands from Senate Democratic appropriators, leaving voting rights advocates and Democratic state election officials in a state of anxiety regarding the electoral landscape ahead.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson dismissed concerns of voter suppression as “Democrat conspiracies” with “no basis in reality.” She reinforced President Trump’s commitment to electoral integrity, claiming, “These Democrat conspiracies have no basis in reality and shouldn’t be uncritically amplified by the mainstream media. ICE’s focus is on removing criminal illegal aliens from this country, who have no business being near polling places.”
Yet, the aggressive tactics employed by ICE have already led to citizens retreating into their homes, with election officials expressing fears that the specter of harassment and arrest could deter individuals from exercising their voting rights. As Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat and gubernatorial candidate, articulated, “In Maine, we witnessed people too frightened to venture out for groceries, work, or school due to fears of wrongful arrest. If citizens are too scared to go to the grocery store because ICE agents are on patrol, that fear will undoubtedly extend to voting.”
Bellows’ office is proactively preparing for next month’s special legislative election by promoting absentee voting procedures, particularly for voters in areas with significant immigrant populations adversely affected by ICE’s recent crackdowns.
The presence of immigration enforcement near polling locations could discourage individuals with noncitizen family members or voters of color, who may fear racial profiling, from participating in the electoral process. The widespread deployment of immigration officers in battleground districts could precipitate chaos in critical races, thereby swinging close elections.
President Trump’s administration has dispatched approximately 3,000 federal agents to Minneapolis for a controversial operation targeting non-citizens, which many view as excessive and heavy-handed. The president has framed this operation as a “day of reckoning and retribution,” linking it to alleged welfare fraud in the state. Compounding the controversy, Attorney General Pam Bondi recently sent a letter to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz demanding the state’s voter rolls, an action described by Minnesota’s legal representatives as a “shakedown” and a “ransom note.”
“The demand for the voter rolls reveals the true nature of this operation,” stated Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), who previously oversaw California’s elections. “It’s an effort to rig the next election and an increasingly desperate move to cling to power.”
Federal law explicitly prohibits “any troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held,” except to “repel armed enemies of the United States.” Many local election officials exercise caution to avoid intimidating voters by keeping law enforcement away from polling places, and some states have regulations governing this practice. Voter intimidation remains illegal nationwide.
Nonetheless, Trump has perpetuated unfounded claims for over a decade that millions of illegal immigrants vote in U.S. elections, arguing this narrative contributed to his 2020 defeat. He had previously vowed to send “sheriffs” and “law enforcement” to polling places before the last election.
Some of Trump’s allies have brazenly suggested the potential deployment of immigration enforcement officers to polling sites to prevent non-citizens from voting. “They’re terrified over at MSNBC and CNN that, since we’re taking control of the cities, ICE officers will be near polling places,” declared former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon last August. “You’re damn right. … We’re not going to allow any illegal aliens to vote.”
Civil rights organizations are bracing for the possibility that Trump might exploit emergency powers to facilitate such actions. Joanna Lydgate, CEO of the States United Democracy Center, expressed concern over the Trump administration using ICE operations as a political weapon. “Trump might attempt to utilize an executive order or emergency powers at the last minute to interfere with the upcoming election, which would be an unprecedented move in American history, but we must be prepared for it,” she warned during a press briefing.
The Trump administration has maintained its focus on election administration, with the FBI executing a search warrant at the Fulton County elections office in Atlanta. Last week, the Justice Department revealed that DOGE employees had been secretly communicating with an advocacy group seeking to “overturn election results in certain states” and may have misused Social Security data to match voter rolls. At Davos, Trump hinted at impending prosecutions related to the 2020 election.
State election officials from both major parties are anxiously awaiting insights from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who are set to address the winter meeting of the National Association of Secretaries of State. A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment on this matter.
Nonprofit legal groups are already mobilizing to challenge any attempts to intimidate voters in the run-up to the November midterms. Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, emphasized the critical role of litigation as a protective measure, stating, “Litigation will serve as an essential guardrail. Numerous cases can be swiftly filed on an emergency basis or even proactively to ensure that communities feel safe.”
David Becker, executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, cautioned that election officials nationwide are witnessing an unprecedented and unconstitutional level of federal interference in their duties. “This is highly unusual,” Becker, a former DOJ civil rights attorney, remarked. “County election officials should not have to ponder what the president of the United States might say about elections.”
Becker noted that election officials are striving to build trust in the electoral process, encouraging voters to utilize various alternatives for casting their ballots, such as early voting or mail-in voting, depending on state regulations.
Interestingly, a surge in immigration enforcement efforts before the election could backfire for Republicans. Recent polls indicate that Trump’s hardline stance on immigration has left him underwater, with a majority of voters believing his deportation policies have gone too far and advocating for moderation. Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School and former Biden White House adviser on democracy and voting rights, pointed to the high turnout in recent special elections for Minnesota legislature seats, suggesting that Democrats are gaining traction in traditionally strongholds.
“In areas where there may be disruption, Minnesota is demonstrating that such tactics could provoke a significant backlash,” Levitt commented.
However, even discussing the topic of election suppression carries the risk of dissuading voters, potentially convincing them that participating in the electoral process entails risks or that outcomes may be predetermined. Conversely, allegations of vote-rigging can have a similar effect.
“Our current battle is to safeguard both the security of our elections and the public’s faith in them, as they are intrinsically linked and both under siege,” said Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson.
Andrew Howard contributed to this report.
