Mass Resignations Hit Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office After Administration Halts Civil Rights Probe

2026-02-07 politics

Minneapolis, Saturday, 7 February 2026.
Approximately 12 prosecutors resigned after administration officials blocked the execution of a search warrant in the Renee Good case, raising critical questions regarding judicial independence.

Executive Intervention Sparks Legal Crisis

The turmoil within the Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s office underscores a deepening constitutional rift between federal law enforcement protocols and executive branch directives. On February 7, 2026, reports emerged that Trump administration leadership explicitly instructed federal prosecutors to cease their investigation into the January 7 killing of Renee Good, despite the existence of a valid warrant to collect evidence from her vehicle [1]. This intervention, spearheaded by senior officials including F.B.I. Director Kash Patel, reportedly stemmed from concerns that a civil rights probe would contradict President Trump’s public assertions that the shooting was an act of self-defense against a “domestic terrorist” [1][3]. The directive effectively nullified the standard judicial process, prompting approximately one dozen prosecutors to resign in protest, a move that signals a severe erosion of morale and autonomy within the Department of Justice [1][6].

Constitutional Clashes and Conflicting Narratives

The factual dispute centers on the events of January 7, 2026, during “Operation Metro Surge” in Minneapolis, where 37-year-old poet and mother Renee Good was fatally shot by Agent Ross [4]. While President Trump claimed Good “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over” the agent, video analysis and independent autopsies have presented a conflicting narrative, showing Good’s vehicle passing the agent as three shots were fired—one striking her in the head [1][4]. The administration’s refusal to pursue a civil rights investigation into Ross, coupled with the blocking of state investigators from accessing critical evidence, has drawn sharp rebuke from Minnesota officials. The FBI reportedly revoked the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension’s access to evidence shortly after the shooting, leading Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty to declare that while the federal government had ceased its probe, state authorities would continue theirs [3][4].

Scrutiny on Agent Conduct and Operational History

Beyond the immediate constitutional crisis, the background of ICE Agent Jonathan Ross has come under intensified scrutiny due to unrelated legal proceedings. Defense attorneys for Roberto Carlos Muñoz-Guatemala, a man convicted in December 2025 of assaulting Ross, filed a motion on February 5, 2026, seeking access to Ross’s personnel and training files [2]. This legal maneuver suggests that evidence from the Good shooting could support claims that Ross has a history of aggressive conduct; in the 2025 incident, Ross was dragged by a vehicle after shattering its window, a scenario the defense argues was precipitated by Ross’s own excessive use of force [2]. While the Department of Justice has declined to pursue criminal charges against Ross for Good’s death, these parallel legal challenges may force the disclosure of internal records the administration has sought to keep private [2].

Sources

Justice Department Executive Power