A border patrol agent stands in front of protestors as people gather near the scene of 26th Street West and Nicollet Avenue, where federal agents shot and killed a 37-year-old man Saturday, Jan. 24, 2026, the third shooting in as many weeks. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

A Border Patrol agent warned Nicole Cleland last month that she’d be arrested if she were again discovered following and observing federal officers. 

Three days later, the 56-year-old Richfield resident received an email saying her expedited airport security screening privileges had been revoked.

Cleland is a frequent traveler and had held Global Entry and TSA PreCheck status without incident since 2014. So the timing of the notice seemed curious, she said in a sworn declaration filed in support of the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit challenging federal law enforcement tactics in Minnesota. The Border Patrol and Transportation Security Administration are both subdivisions of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, as is U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“Given that only three days had passed from the time that I was stopped, I am concerned that the revocation was the result of me following and observing the agents. This is intimidation and retaliation,” Cleland said in the declaration.  

A year into the second Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, Cleland is one of countless U.S. residents and visitors touched by the federal government’s rapidly changing data collection and surveillance apparatus. Some, like an AI-powered social media analyzer and an error-prone facial recognition tool, evoke dystopian sci-fi. Others, like automatic license plate readers, have been around for decades. 

Elected officials, privacy advocates, and ordinary community members working as constitutional observers are increasingly alarmed that the Trump administration could use these tools to chill constitutionally protected expression, while at the same time pressuring tech companies — many of which have cozied up to Trump in his second term — to make it harder for Americans to keep tabs on their government. 

Senior administration officials haven’t done much to dispel those concerns. Tom Homan, the “border czar” who’s now the face of Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota, said on Jan. 15 that he’s pushing to create a “database” of people who “interfere or impede or assault an ICE officer.” 

Such a database wouldn’t outwardly differ much from the numerous information repositories the federal government already maintains. But its purpose — and, in some cases, the tools used to collect and analyze the data — may prove to be a new frontier in the emerging surveillance state.  

Facial recognition software

The Border Patrol agent who warned Cleland told her his unit had “facial recognition,” according to her deposition.

Reporting by 404 Media and other media outlets indicates that ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agencies use multiple AI-powered facial recognition tools, including Mobile Fortify and Clearview AI. Local law enforcement agencies deputized to work with ICE use a different facial recognition app, Mobile Identify, according to NPR.

DHS has used facial recognition software at airports and land border crossings for years, but its use in the field is a more recent development that civil liberties experts say represents a major expansion of government surveillance. 

Using proprietary algorithms, the tools try to match images captured in the field with data already in DHS databases, including names, birthdates, citizenship status and photos taken at U.S. entry points. DHS says it retains “biographic exit data” on U.S. citizens and permanent residents for 15 years, though it’s unclear whether this applies to images collected in the field as well.

Even before Operation Metro Surge began in earnest, lawmakers sounded alarms about the implications.

“This type of on-demand surveillance is harrowing and it should put all of us on guard,” U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, told NPR in November.

Human analytics apps

ICE also uses AI-powered apps to analyze social media activity and other digital data points to create “life profiles” for people of interest.

The agency has spent at least $5 million on Tangles, a sophisticated tool developed by a company with ties to Israel’s cyber-intelligence community, Forbes reported in September. Tangles mines social media posts, event sign-ups, mobile contacts, location data and more to create nuanced individual portraits and tease out patterns of activity — including organizing and protest — in specific places.

“Our powerful web intelligence solution monitors online activity, collecting and analyzing data of endless digital channels – from the open, deep and dark web, to mobile and social,” Tangles’ Microsoft Marketplace listing says.

The Verge reported in October that ICE has spent a similar amount on another digital monitoring tool called Zignal Labs, which uses AI text and video analysis to process billions of social media posts daily into what it calls “curated detection feeds.” The product includes near real-time alerts. “Sample workflows” featured in a Zignal Labs marketing pamphlet shared with The Lever include “an ongoing operation in Gaza” and a 2023 social media post purporting to show U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh at the Mall of America.

Cellular snooping

Since September 2024, ICE has paid more than $1.6 million to a Maryland company that integrates a type of cell-site simulator popularly known as a “stingray” into government vehicles. 

TechCrunch first reported the purchases, which are a matter of public record. It’s unclear how often ICE uses vehicles equipped with stingrays in its operations, but a Utah judge reportedly authorized the agency to use one to track down a specific individual last summer. 

Stingrays trick nearby cell phones into connecting with them instead of legitimate transmitters, collecting reams of random users’ data in the process. That, plus past instances of warrantless snooping, makes them controversial even among law enforcement agencies. Ars Technica reported in 2015 that the FBI required local law enforcement agencies to drop cases rather than reveal evidence in court that “would potentially or actually compromise the equipment/technology.”

ICE is also interested in using — and may already be using — another cell-snooping tool that requires no external hardware. 

Last summer, the independent national security journalist Jack Poulson reported that the agency had reactivated a $2 million contract with the Israeli spyware developer Paragon Solutions. Once delivered via text message — no link required — Paragon’s spyware gains broad access to a phone’s contents, including encrypted messages.

“It’s an extremely dangerous surveillance tech that really goes against our Fourth Amendment protections,” Jeramie Scott, senior counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told NPR in November.

People whistle and film as federal agents block an alley near 35th Street and Chicago Avenue while they break a car window to detain a man and his young daughter Thursday, Jan. 22, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

Less than an hour after the Saturday morning killing of Alex Pretti by federal agents in south Minneapolis, conservative influencer Cam Higby took to social media with a sensational claim: Higby had “infiltrated” the group chats fueling local resistance to Operation Metro Surge.

On Monday, FBI director Kash Patel said he had “opened an investigation” into the chats. Many are said to be hosted on Signal, the encrypted messaging app.

“You cannot create a scenario that illegally entraps and puts law enforcement in harm’s way,” Patel said in a podcast interview with Benny Johnson, another conservative influencer. Johnson’s title for the episode’s YouTube stream, “Kash Patel Announces FBI Crack-Down of Left-Wing Minnesota Terrorist Network LIVE: ‘Tim Walz Next…’,” left little to the imagination.

In response to emailed questions about the nature of its investigation, the FBI declined to comment. 

First Amendment lawyers and national security experts expressed deep skepticism that any charges stemming from it will stick, however. 

“As a general proposition, reporting on things you are observing and sharing those observations is absolutely legal,” Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota Law School, said in an interview.

A guide that Higby described as “the watered down opsec version” of a “TRAINING MANUAL for domestic terrorist patrols chasing ICE agents in Minneapolis” instructs observers to draw attention to suspected ICE activity using whistles and car horns — but specifically warns against impeding officers.

Kirtley said Patel’s statements to date have been too vague to support firm conclusions about what the FBI will actually investigate or what charges, if any, the United States Department of Justice would bring as a result. The sorts of loaded terms that influencers like Higby and President Trump himself have used to describe organizers’ activities — such as “conspiracy” or “insurrection” — are formal legal concepts that require certain standards to be met, she added.

Jason Marisam, a constitutional law professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, said any prosecution would likely need to pass a two-part test established in a nearly 60-year-old U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Brandenburg v. Ohio.

Brandenburg prohibits speech only if it is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” such as violence against law enforcement officers, and “is likely to incite or produce such action,” according to a summary by Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. 

Brandenburg is “a very high bar,” Marisam said. Speech that only indirectly led to “lawless action,” such as coordinating a protest that later turned violent, would likely not meet it, he added.

Marisam said Brandenburg, incidentally, is the same standard that former special counsel Jack Smith would have needed to meet had his January 6th prosecution against President Trump gone to trial, Marisam added. That case was mooted after Trump won a second term and subsequently oversaw a campaign of professional retribution against the career prosecutors on Smith’s team. 

Marisam said narrowing or overturning Brandenburg has not yet been a priority for conservatives in the judiciary, despite self-evident benefits for Trump’s efforts to quell dissent and consolidate power. But he acknowledged that the “politics of free speech” can change depending on who’s in charge in Washington.

For instance, Trump supporters castigated what they perceived to be limits on free speech during the Biden years, but have remained silent in the face of a student’s deportation for writing an op-ed. 

Still, Patel’s apparent interest in Twin Cities observers’ encrypted chats is likely less the opening move of a well-thought-out legal strategy than an effort to discourage legally permissible activity, Marisam said.

“It seems to me that (Patel’s) announcement is meant to chill speech ahead of time,” he said.

In a blog post published Tuesday, Patrick Eddington, a senior fellow with the libertarian Cato Institute, said federal prosecutors would likewise struggle to make hay out of Twin Cities observers’ use of the encrypted messaging apps themselves. 

Trump officials and right-wing pundits have pointed to Signal’s popularity within the observer networks as evidence that participants want to evade legal accountability for their actions. Signal uses end-to-end encryption, meaning messages sent on properly secured devices kept in their owners’ possession are effectively impossible for third parties to see. Signal itself can’t access messages or calls sent over the app, the company says, though messages on a user’s device can be read if it is hacked or stolen. (Or, if the wrong person is added to a Signal chat, as when senior national security figures in the Trump administration — including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth — sent information about military operations to the editor of The Atlantic magazine after he’d been accidentally included.) 

Eddington, who works on homeland security and civil liberties issues for Cato, said the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ 1999 ruling in Bernstein v. United States Department of Justice established ordinary citizens’ rights to use encrypted channels for communication they wish to keep private. Government efforts to curtail encryption could impede individuals’ rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits “unreasonable search and seizure.”

Eddington cited a much earlier precedent that may well have informed the Constitution’s privacy protections, though its contemporary legal relevance is unclear. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and other members of America’s founding generation used “codes and ciphers” to communicate before, during and after the Revolutionary War, Eddington wrote. 

“The use of encryption to keep government authorities from getting access to our private communications is literally as American as apple pie,” he wrote.

Hundreds gather around a growing memorial site at 26th Street and Nicollet Avenue, where federal agents shot and killed a 37-year-old Alex Pretti Saturday, Jan. 24, 2026 earlier in the day. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

The federal killing of a U.S. citizen in Minneapolis this month, captured from multiple angles by witnesses recording on their cell phones, kicked off a dizzying day here and in Washington. Democratic politicians and ordinary Americans reacted with a mix of outrage and incredulousness, backfooting the Trump administration as the federal operation Democratic Gov. Tim Walz has called an “occupation” approached its third month.

By late Saturday, a Trump-appointed Minnesota federal judge had ordered the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to refrain from “destroying or altering evidence.” 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said his party would block a must-pass government appropriations package — and partially shut down the government next week — if it contained additional funding for the Homeland Security Department. 

As it did earlier this month after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed 37-year-old Minneapolis resident Renee Nicole Good, senior Trump administration officials worked swiftly on Saturday to blame the incident on the victim. 

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem called Alex Jeffrey Pretti a “domestic terrorist,” echoing language used by Vice President JD Vance to describe Good. Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino said Pretti appeared eager to inflict “maximum damage” on the federal agents assembled near the intersection of Nicollet Avenue and 26th Street Saturday morning. Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump’s chief domestic policy advisor, called Pretti an “assassin.” 

Videos taken at the scene — as well as what’s known about Pretti’s background — belie the Trump administration’s claims. Pretti was a lawful gun owner with a concealed carry permit and no criminal record, according to Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara. 

Moments before he was shot, Pretti could be seen on video with his phone — not a gun — recording federal officers, as has become standard practice among anti-ICE activists. 

A cell phone video shows a gaggle of Border Patrol agents wrestling him to the ground and beating him; an agent removes Pretti’s holstered gun, and Pretti appears to pose no threat to the officers surrounding him. Moments later, about 10 shots ring out. 

In a sworn affidavit filed Saturday evening, a physician who lives nearby said Pretti had no pulse when they arrived at the scene. The physician, whose name and identity were not made public, said agents did not appear to be rendering lifesaving aid and initially refused the physician’s offer to help. Pretti was pronounced dead at the scene a short time later.

Pretti’s name had emerged in media reports by early afternoon. It’s unclear whether federal, state or local officials attempted to notify his next of kin beforehand. Michael Pretti, his father, said he first learned of the shooting from an Associated Press reporter.

“I can’t get any information from anybody,” Michael Pretti told the AP, detailing a runaround with the Border Patrol, local police and area hospitals. He said the Hennepin County Medical Examiner eventually confirmed they had Alex Pretti’s body.

“We are heartbroken but also very angry,” Pretti’s parents said in a statement released later on Saturday that described Pretti as a “hero” who “wanted to make a difference in this world.”

“The sickening lies told about our son by the administration are reprehensible and disgusting,” they said. “Please get the truth out about our son.”

Meanwhile, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said DHS officials blocked their investigators from the crime scene even after they returned with a judicial warrant. The details of the warrant are unclear, as is the BCA’s recourse if Homeland Security continues to stymie its efforts. Federal officials said Saturday that Homeland Security — not the FBI or the Minnesota BCA — would lead the investigation.

The names of the agents involved in the shooting have not been released. Bovino told CNN on Sunday that he did not know whether more than one agent fired shots.

Minnesota officials questioned Homeland Security’s handling of the shooting’s aftermath and indicated they did not trust the department to conduct a fair investigation. 

The Minnesota Department of Corrections unveiled a new website this weekend to combat “ongoing misinformation” from Homeland Security. In a lengthy statement on Saturday, the department called into question Bovino’s initial explanation for the operation that led to Pretti’s death. The statement said the individual named by Bovino as the target of the operation did not have a significant criminal history, as Bovino alleged, and was previously released from immigration custody in 2018 — during the first Trump administration.

A recent article by Stateline, which is a States Newsroom outlet like the Reformer, found that eyewitness testimony and other evidence often contradicts DHS’ initial description of incidents involving its agents.

On Sunday, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he expects Homeland Security to heed Saturday’s court order to preserve evidence to support the state’s own investigation.

“We’ve had to threaten them with contempt a few times, but open defiance of court orders is not something that we’ve experienced,” Ellison told the Star Tribune.

Signs had emerged by Sunday that at least some elected Republicans and gun rights groups were uncomfortable with the official line that Pretti posed a clear and present danger before his death. Few elected Republicans wholeheartedly endorsed the administration’s narrative, and even some right-wing influencers who typically hew to the party line recoiled.

Republican Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who faces a primary challenge from his right this year, called Saturday’s shooting “incredibly disturbing.”

“The credibility of ICE and DHS are at stake,” he said on Sunday. “There must be a full joint federal and state investigation.”

The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus also issued a statement calling for an independent investigation.

“Every peaceable Minnesotan has the right to keep and bear arms — including while attending protests, acting as observers, or exercising their First Amendment rights. These rights do not disappear when someone is lawfully armed, and they must be respected and protected at all times,” the group said.

Kevin Stitt, the outgoing Republican governor of Oklahoma, hinted in a Sunday interview with CNN that the administration should rethink its immigration enforcement efforts.

“And so what’s the goal right now? Is it to deport every single non-U.S. citizen? I don’t think that’s what Americans want,” he said. “We have to stop politicizing this. We need real solutions on immigration reform.”

Dozens of Minnesota business leaders released an open letter that gently called for a change in approach by the federal government, risking the ire of Trump, who is known for his retribution against those who oppose him. 

“With yesterday’s tragic news, we are calling for an immediate deescalation of tensions and for state, local and federal officials to work together to find real solutions,” the CEOs wrote. 

Among them were top officers of Medtronic, 3M, Target and the sports franchises. This is notable because as the Reformer previously reported, the state’s biggest companies had been publicly silent until now. Business leaders, the chamber letter asserts, have been “working behind the scenes” since the federal siege began. 

Some in the Trump administration may be looking for an escape hatch, even if on their terms.  On Saturday, Attorney General Pam Bondi said Minnesota could end the federal law enforcement surge if it repealed pro-immigrant “sanctuary” policies and turned over its voter rolls to the federal government. (Minnesota is not a “sanctuary state”; an effort to pass a sanctuary law the last time Democrats controlled the Legislature went nowhere.)

That Bondi made such an offer at all is notable. But it’s unlikely to lead to a resolution. On Sunday, Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon brushed off the idea of providing state voter information to the federal government in a caustic statement.

“The answer to Attorney General Bondi’s request is no. Her letter is an outrageous attempt to coerce Minnesota into giving the federal government private data on millions of U.S. Citizens in violation of state and federal law,” Simon said.

False claims of voter fraud have become a staple of the Trumpist political movement. A group of right-wing activists led by Mike Lindell — the pillow mogul currently running for governor as a Republican — claimed widespread voter fraud after the 2020 election. But as part of the state’s usual election auditing process, a random group of precincts in every congressional district were chosen for review, totaling roughly 440,000 votes after the 2020 election, spanning more than 200 precincts. The hand tallies were virtually identical to the machine tallies.

Ensign Lake in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. (Photo by Zach Spindler-Krage)

A proposal to repeal a ban on mining in northeastern Minnesota’s Superior National Forest is headed to the U.S. Senate following approval in the House, reigniting a long-simmering fight between environmentalists and pro-mining interests.

The reaction of outdoors and environmental groups was swift Wednesday.

“Congress just tossed aside years of scientific study and local input about how to conserve the headwaters of this wilderness for future generations, allowing the threat of toxic mining to return,” Jordan Schreiber, director of government relations at The Wilderness Society, said in a statement. He called on the Senate to “reject this attack and the precedent it sets to arbitrarily strike down” public land protections.

House Republicans voted Wednesday to undo former President Joe Biden’s 20-year moratorium on the extraction of copper, nickel and other minerals across more than 225,000 acres near the popular Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. If approved by the Republican-controlled Senate, the resolution would next go to President Donald Trump, who has indicated he would sign it into law. 

The resolution requires only a simple majority vote to pass the Senate, rather than a filibuster-proof majority.

Republican Congressman Pete Stauber, whose Duluth-based district covers the area, introduced the resolution last year. It uses an obscure but increasingly popular procedural tool that allows Congress to void certain Executive Branch actions.

In a statement Wednesday, Stauber hailed the resolution’s passage as a win for the regional economy, national security and congressional prerogatives. The resolution would prevent future administrations from imposing similar bans in the future.

“Reversing Biden’s mining ban will protect Northern Minnesota jobs, strengthen national security through domestic production, and prevent future overreaches from happening again,” Stauber said.

Organized labor cheered the move, too, albeit in terms more palatable to the Democratic base.

“One of the most important contributions Minnesota can make to the fight against climate change is leading the world in setting the highest bar for labor and environmental protections in the responsible production of copper, nickel and other critical minerals,” Joel Smith, president and business manager of LIUNA Minnesota and North Dakota, said in a statement, also mentioning the promise of “family-supporting careers” for union members and “community-supporting jobs at schools, hospitals, public and private sector employers.”

Environmental and outdoor recreation groups have long opposed mining near the Boundary Waters, a remote section of Superior National Forest along the border with Canada. The groups say it would disturb critical habitats and pollute a pristine watershed enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. 

In a statement describing the resolution as an unprecedented use of congressional power over public land use, Save the Boundary Waters urged voters to contact their senators and push for a “no” vote on the resolution. Save the Boundary Waters is pushing for a permanent ban on copper-ore sulfide mining in the boundary watershed. Citing peer-reviewed scientific research, the group says mining for copper and other heavy metals inevitably leaches sulfuric acid, toxic metals and other pollutants into surrounding water systems, harming the natural environment and imperiling tourism.

Northeast Minnesota sits atop the Duluth Complex, one of the world’s richest deposits of copper and nickel. Twin Metals, a subsidiary of the Chilean mining conglomerate Antofagasta, wants to extract both minerals — along with cobalt and other precious metals — from underground veins near Ely and Babbitt, about a dozen miles from the wilderness area.

It would be the first copper-nickel mine in Minnesota, which produces most of the United States’ domestic iron but few other metals. Regional and state officials have sought for years to reduce northeastern Minnesota’s economic dependence on volatile global markets for iron and steel. Its rich deposits of higher-value metals, along with elusive gases like helium and possibly hydrogen, could offer a lifeline.

The Twin Metals project has been in development for more than 15 years amid an arduous state and federal permitting process. It suffered a severe setback in early 2023 when the Biden administration announced a 20-year moratorium on mining across 350 square miles of the Superior National Forest, though Minnesota has issued new mineral exploration permits in the years since.  

Copper, nickel, cobalt and some precious metals are key inputs for a bevy of medical, automotive and industrial products. They’re also needed to produce wind turbines, solar panels, rechargeable batteries and other electrical technologies that scientists say are crucial for mitigating local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Environmentalists say the the demand can be met with more robust recycling. 

Mining companies and their allies say it’s better for everyone’s sake to extract them in the United States rather than countries with lax environmental and human health protections, such as China or the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Removing the 20-year moratorium allows “proposed developments to proceed through the world’s strictest state and federal regulatory and permitting processes,” Stauber said on Wednesday.