The protection racket regime

Bondi's letter puts the quiet part on paper.

Bondi and Deputy AG Todd Blanche at the White House earlier this month. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty

---

Public Notice is supported by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️

---

If Minnesotans had any hope that the execution of Alex Pretti would result in a different approach from the Trump administration … well, they were half-right.

Blowback to the killing seems to have been the impetus for the removal of CBP Commander Greg Bovino, the Lilliputian Nazi who had made himself the avatar of the siege of Minneapolis. It also resulted in an exceedingly weird, unethical, and unprecedented missive from Attorney General Pam Bondi (more on that soon).

Bovino’s replacement as the face of the ICE invasion in Minnesota is bribe enthusiast and “border czar” Tom Homan. While a lot of the mainstream media credulously reported that this represented a draw-down, a rethink, or a recalibration, Homan’s remarks on Thursday should dispel that entirely. He whined about how tough it is for ICE agents because they “can’t eat in restaurants, people spit on you, blowing whistles at you.”

Buddy, ICE is murdering our residents.

Homan also said these untrained and violent goons have “been in theater a long time.” That’s a reference to military actions, and sorta gives away the game that the federal government does actually see Minnesota as hostile territory to be conquered. So much for the lighter touch.

Sure, Homan did include a with a meaningless statement about how he is now focused on a “draw down” to throw people off the scent. But he also declared that ”justice is coming” for people who have organized and funded what he called “attacks on ICE.”

But being run out of restaurants and whistled at are not coordinated attacks, and did we mention that ICE is murdering our residents?

Finally, if you were wondering if that “draw down” is at all real, know that literally as Homan’s press conference was occurring, ICE agents abducted one person in Minneapolis from their vehicle, and, in trying to abduct an additional person, hit their car. Much kinder and gentler and definitely lowering the temperature, right? (As this newsletter was being finalized Thursday evening, Trump did a gaggle where he admitted there is no draw down in Minnesota, telling reporters he’s not pulling back and “nothing is going to change.”)

Homan’s presence in Minnesota is brand new, and he will have plenty of opportunities to be as awful as Bovino but with a nicer veneer. Meanwhile, the state still has Bondi’s shocking letter to deal with.

DOJ’s random note

Fam, is it good when the nation’s chief law enforcement officer says the government will stop its violent and illegal occupation of Minnesota only if the state bends the knee? And is it good when the nation’s chief law enforcement officer thinks this is a totally fine and good and normal thing to put in writing for all the world to see?

It’s impossible to describe Bondi’s letter to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz without resorting to words like “unprecedented” and “unbelievable.” Sending what amounts to a ransom note on the same day that multiple federal agents shot Pretti as he was defenseless on the ground is quite a choice.

At the same time the administration blamed Pretti for his own murder, Bondi decided to go full protection racket. All Minnesota has to do is pay off the regime by agreeing to Trump’s unconstitutional demands that have literally nothing to do with the so-called fraud that has been the justification for occupying the state.

According to Bondi, the federal government will only leave Minnesota if:

1. The state gives the federal government all Medicaid and Food and Nutrition Service program data, including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program information.

2. The state repeals any sanctuary policies and require all state and local detention facilities to imprison detained immigrants, and allows ICE access to all detainees in order to determine their immigration status.

3. The state gives the government all its voter data.

Oh, is that all?

Make no mistake: Bondi is a buffoon for sending this letter, but the letter represents nothing less than a complete fracturing of federalism. The administration is saying in no uncertain terms that it will rain violence, financial deprivation, and sham investigations on a state unless it does what Trump wants.

Notably, none of these demands is based on any credible allegation that Minnesota has violated any federal laws. Rather, it’s a bald-faced ultimatum that the state must adopt Trump’s preferred policies or the (regrettably, quite literal) beatings will continue.

For example, there’s no law invoked to justify the demand for all Medicaid and SNAP data. Instead, Bondi says that giving the administration every shred of it will allow them to “efficiently investigate fraud” that will “save Minnesota taxpayers’ money and ensure that Minnesota’s welfare funds are being used to help those in need, not enrich fraudsters.”

Let’s pretend for a moment that the federal government genuinely wants to investigate fraud rather than use it as a racist excuse to terrorize the state. There’s still no explanation of how this data in particular would increase the federal government’s ability to efficiently investigate.

There’s also the fact that the federal government already tried to demand detailed personal data for every SNAP applicant and recipient in every state and was promptly sued by Minnesota and 21 other states last July. A California federal court issued a temporary restraining order in September and a preliminary injunction in October, both of which bar the administration from continuing to try to get that data or penalizing states for failing to provide it. But the federal government continues to fight this, including by making a very, um, novel argument that because it has now demanded the same data, but under a different part of the SNAP statute, it isn’t violating the preliminary injunction.

So, having been told twice by a federal court that it cannot have individual-level, detailed SNAP data from Minnesota or the other states that sued, the administration regrouped and decided, what the heck, why not just threaten Minnesota with ongoing ICE violence and get the data that way?

The regime's mind-bending lies are a tactic

The demand that Minnesota repeal its sanctuary policies doesn’t even get the sort of fig leaf invoked for the SNAP data. Instead, Bondi says that “removing criminal illegal aliens from Minnesota neighborhoods will save lives, and state and local officials should support this goal.” The demand that ICE be allowed into all detention facilities to remove immigrants doesn’t have any law attached to it, but does have a not-very-veiled threat:

“I urge you to reach an agreement with ICE that allows them to remove illegal aliens in custody of Minnesota’s prisons and jails and avoids pushing these interactions into your streets.”

You see? If only Minnesota would just let ICE into the jails, that would stop them from abducting and murdering people in the streets. So friendly!

The reason that even someone as mendacious as Bondi doesn’t have any law to prop up this demand is that courts keep saying that the federal government cannot force states to assist with federal immigration efforts and also cannot withhold federal funding simply because a state has sanctuary laws. That’s thanks to the Tenth Amendment and the Anti-Commandeering Doctrine. The federal government can’t coerce states into administering or enforcing federal mandates.

Federalism can protect Americans from tyranny

So, as with SNAP, here the administration is demanding that Minnesota do voluntarily what it has persistently been unable to force states to do via the courts.

And how about that demand for voter data? Well, that’s just second verse, same as the first. Here’s the justification for that one: giving them all data will “confirm that Minnesota’s voter registration practices comply with federal law as authorized by the Civil Rights Act of 1960.” Hmm. Is there any allegation that Minnesota has violated that in some way? Nope! What else you got, Pam? “Fulfilling this common sense request will better guarantee free and fair elections and boost confidence in the rule of law.”

Oh, so it’s a “common sense request.” Got it. Is that the legal justification for the DOJ suing over 20 states for refusing to turn over their voter rolls? Weird, then, that earlier this month, a California federal judge told the administration it could not get sensitive voter information for 23 million Californians, saying it was “unprecedented and illegal.” Also so strange that the federal court in Oregon was so quick to dismiss the DOJ’s voter roll lawsuit there that he ruled from the bench two weeks ago, before even writing an order.

Fun fact about this Oregon case: After Bondi sent her little postcard of demands to Minnesota, the judge in Oregon ordered the parties to provide “supplemental argument on the relevance of this letter in interpreting ‘basis and purpose’ in the context of Plaintiff’s claim under Title III of The Civil Rights Act of 1960.” The government’s supplemental authority consisted of saying that it had reached voluntary agreements with Georgia and Texas for those states to give up their rolls.

Look, we know the only lawyers left arguing these sorts of cases for the DOJ are there because they are true-believer Trump dead-enders, but literally any lawyer knows that voluntary agreements are in no way “authority” in a court. Just because Georgia and Texas were willing to throw their own voters under the bus for nothing except the fleeting goodwill of a madman doesn’t mean a court has to do the same to Oregon.

Speaking of a court requiring the parties to address Bondi’s letter, perhaps she forgot that the DOJ was mid-litigation with Minnesota, with the state having sued the administration earlier this month, asking the court to rule that the surge of federal immigration agents in the state was unconstitutional and unlawful and permanently enjoin the government from any similar surges. The complaint also requested the court hold that the administration isn’t allowed to arrest people willy-nilly, even without an immigration detainer, that ICE goons shouldn’t be allowed to point their firearms at people based on their ‘roided-up vibes rather than that they are in actual danger, and stop arresting people for exercising their First Amendment rights.

On January 25, the day after Bondi sent her letter, the state filed a declaration letting the court know all about the unhinged quid pro quo Bondi was demanding. To show that this was indeed intended to be coercive, the state submitted as exhibits several social media posts by Trump and administration officials. Here’s Trump saying that Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey’s statement that Minneapolis will not enforce federal immigration law “is a very serious violation of the Law and he is PLAYING WITH FIRE.”

Here’s the official White House account making a different series of demands, including turning over all incarcerated undocumented immigrants and anyone with an active warrant so DHS can immediately deport them, assist federal authorities with detaining undocumented immigrants, and working with the federal government in the “rapid removal” of all undocumented immigrants. And if Minnesota does that, per the White House: “It’s that simple. End the chaos.”

How about Trump over on Truth Social with roughly the same demands, where he calls on Minnesota officials and “EVERY Democrat Governor and Mayor” in the country to “formally cooperate with the Trump Administration to enforce our Nation’s Laws, rather than resist and stoke the flames of Division, Chaos, and Violence.”

Perhaps you’d like to peep Bondi’s official X account, where she says that ICE is only in Minnesota because of “dangerous sanctuary policies.”

All of that sure sounds like the administration is telling Minnesota that the murderous ICE terrorism will only stop if the state voluntarily agrees to conditions the federal government knows full well are not only not grounded in any law but also are things the courts have explicitly told the administration it cannot do.

So how did the DOJ address this in the Minnesota case? Well, by saying that, gosh, they weren’t being coercive at all, and how could you possibly think that? Oh, and all those social media posts? They don’t show coercion, but instead “reflect a commonsense proposition: If a state or locality decides not to assist the federal government, the federal government may need to devote more resources to that jurisdiction.”

Lookie here, another commonsense proposition with no law!

The DOJ would also like you to know that a social media post from the literal president talking about “retribution” against Minnesota is of little relevance, “especially given Operation Metro Surge’s facially valid justification.”

This is quite the little trick. First, it asserts as settled law that the justification for surging thousands of agents into Minnesota is “facially valid,” but that’s literally the core fight at the heart of the lawsuit. You can’t justify your actions just by saying they’re totally valid when you are in a fight about whether they are valid.

To be fair, the DOJ did find a case to cite for this argument, noting that in 2018, in Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court rejected the idea that Trump’s overt statements showing anti-Muslim animus could be considered when the underlying action — Trump’s Muslim travel ban — was “expressly premised on legitimate purposes.” However, that’s just a retread of the argument that the ICE invasion is obviously legally valid, a thing that is very much in dispute.

Pretending that the president’s social media account is just that of a widdle guy, his personal place to just vibe out, is also absurd given that just last week, Trump’s solicitor general and former criminal defense attorney John Sauer told the Supreme Court that Trump firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook via a letter he posted to Truth Social constituted sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard and that Cook should have responded via social media post as well.

The mob boss presidency

So, to recap: when the president wants to use his social media account to fire someone, it’s very much an official statement, but when he wants to use his social media account to threaten “retribution” on a state, that’s just unofficial riffing. And it’s not at all coercive for the government to tell the state that the “simple” way to “end the chaos” of the ICE occupation is to surrender its sovereignty.

As a last-ditch effort, the DOJ told the court there is no coercion because, well, they would never honor a deal: “Regardless, there is no hint of a quid pro quo in the Attorney General’s letter; she does not offer Plaintiffs a trade or commit to end Operation Metro Surge under any circumstance Instead, citing the adverse “consequences” of certain policy choices for the people Minnesota, the letter attempts to find common ground on three different issues, only or of which has any connection to this case.”

So, the state should do what the federal government says, but they are just asking nicely! But also they will not actually agree that ICE leaves if the state does these things!

See? Classic protection racket. Keep paying off the administration by succumbing to its ever-increasing demands, but know that in the end, submitting won’t save you from our violent mob boss of a president. That’s no bargain at all.

---

That’s it for today

We’ll be back with a new episode of Nir & Rupar this afternoon at 2pm eastern on the Substack app and a special Saturday edition of the newsletter tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription.

Thanks for reading, and for your support.

---