The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation into the contentious policy introduced by Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, which requires prosecutors to factor in a defendant’s race when negotiating plea deals.
This initiative, supported by Soros-affiliated funding, mandates that prosecutors assess a defendant’s racial background alongside other factors during plea negotiations and sentencing discussions, a move that critics argue undermines constitutional principles and could foster division within the community.
Officially effective as of April 28, 2025, the policy has drawn fire for promoting race-based considerations in the judicial process, which many claim could endanger the integrity of the legal system.
According to an internal document titled “Negotiations Policy for Cases Involving Adult Defendants,” prosecutors are instructed to incorporate a defendant’s “racial identity and age” when formulating plea agreements, as reported by KSTP.
While the policy asserts that race and age should not be the basis for deviations from Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines, it paradoxically emphasizes the need to regard defendants as “whole persons,” with race explicitly identified as a significant factor in the decision-making process.
The document states:
“Although racial identity and age should not be grounds for departures [from the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines], proposed resolutions must take into account the entirety of the person charged, including their racial identity and age. These factors, while not predominant, should inform the overall assessment. Racial disparities damage our community, breed distrust, and negatively affect community safety. Prosecutors are encouraged to identify and mitigate these disparities at relevant decision points.”
In a formal letter to Moriarty, DOJ officials outlined that the investigation will scrutinize whether the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office (HCAO) is engaged in a systematic pattern of infringing on rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Citing concerns under 34 U.S.C. § 12601, the DOJ is concentrating its efforts on what it describes as the “illegal consideration of race in prosecutorial decision-making.”
Assistant Attorney General Bondi confirmed that the DOJ will conduct a thorough examination of all relevant HCAO policies and practices that may involve unlawful racial considerations in prosecutorial activities.
The letter makes it abundantly clear that this is not a mere preliminary inquiry. The DOJ’s formidable Civil Rights Division is mobilizing its Special Litigation Section to oversee an extensive investigation, with authorization already secured from the Assistant Attorney General.
This week we @TheJusticeDept @CivilRights initiated a racial discrimination pattern and practice investigation into Hennepin County, Minnesota’s recently announced policy of incorporating race into plea offers. More updates to follow. pic.twitter.com/VLn1998Obl
— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) May 4, 2025
Moriarty, who assumed office in 2022, has previously faced backlash for her approach to prosecutorial decisions, particularly for offering lenient plea deals in notable cases.
In one such instance in 2023, she offered juvenile plea deals to two teenagers accused of second-degree murder, prompting public outrage and intervention from Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison, who subsequently took over the prosecution.
Moreover, last month, Moriarty opted not to pursue criminal charges against a staffer for Governor Walz who was caught vandalizing multiple Teslas, causing approximately $20,000 in damage. The individual, Dylan Bryan Adams, was filmed keying a Tesla while out for a walk with his dog.
In stark contrast, a young woman with no prior criminal record has been accused of keying her co-worker’s vehicle, and she appears to be facing charges.
Is this not a glaring example of selective justice? Why does the staffer of Governor Walz evade consequences, while the young woman without political connections faces prosecution?
