Democrats' Response to Minneapolis Chaos Could Be to Their Detriment

Ben Shapiro
Wed, 28 Jan 2026 12:32:11 -0800
Opinion

The unrest surrounding federal immigration enforcement in Minneapolis did not arise by accident. It is the product of a combustible mix: deliberate obstruction by Democratic officials, wall-to-wall legacy media coverage and two tragic incidents that were mishandled by senior figures inside the Trump administration. Together, these forces have produced exactly the chaos critics warned about — and have now forced the administration into a public course correction.

On Tuesday, the administration announced that Gregory Bovino, the Border Patrol chief overseeing operations in Minnesota, has been removed from his post and is expected to return to El Centro, California. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is reportedly under intense scrutiny as well, following her department's handling of two fatal encounters in which American citizens were shot by federal agents under disputed circumstances. Those failures have placed the administration on the defensive and handed political momentum to its opponents.

But the story does not begin with those shootings. It begins with the systematic obstruction of federal law by Democratic leaders in blue states and cities.
Updated: Wed Jan 28, 2026

The unrest surrounding federal immigration enforcement in Minneapolis did not arise by accident. It is the product of a combustible mix: deliberate obstruction by Democratic officials, wall-to-wall legacy media coverage and two tragic incidents that were mishandled by senior figures inside the Trump administration. Together, these forces have produced exactly the chaos critics warned about — and have now forced the administration into a public course correction.

On Tuesday, the administration announced that Gregory Bovino, the Border Patrol chief overseeing operations in Minnesota, has been removed from his post and is expected to return to El Centro, California. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is reportedly under intense scrutiny as well, following her department's handling of two fatal encounters in which American citizens were shot by federal agents under disputed circumstances. Those failures have placed the administration on the defensive and handed political momentum to its opponents.

But the story does not begin with those shootings. It begins with the systematic obstruction of federal law by Democratic leaders in blue states and cities.

For months, Democratic officials have sought to block cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, while publicly pressuring the administration to scale back deportations altogether. This has collided with the political reality of immigration enforcement. While "mass deportation" has long been a feature of President Donald Trump's rhetoric, public support has always been far more specific. Americans overwhelmingly favor removing illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes — rape, assault, arson and murder — not indiscriminate sweeps.

Early in the administration, enforcement largely reflected that reality. Criminal offenders were the priority. But as blue states increasingly refused to cooperate with ICE, that strategy became harder to sustain. In jurisdictions that work with federal authorities, local police can flag immigration status after an arrest and transfer dangerous offenders to ICE custody safely inside jails. In sanctuary cities, that option disappears.

The result is predictable. Suspects may be released back into the community, and ICE agents are forced to pursue targets in public spaces — knocking on doors, making street arrests, and triggering confrontations. Those confrontations produce protests, viral videos and disturbing images that dominate television screens.

This is the paradox of law enforcement: Americans say they want law and order, but they recoil from seeing it enforced in real time. The work is messy, tense and often ugly. That discomfort is not unique to immigration enforcement. Police officers face similar backlash every time videos circulate showing them intervening on what is often the worst day of someone's life.

When those images include disputed deaths — particularly of American citizens — the effect is magnified. Media narratives quickly broaden from individual incidents to sweeping indictments of law enforcement itself.

Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel offered a vivid example this week, portraying federal agents as "mask-wearing goons" committing "one atrocity after another" in Minneapolis. His monologue described families being terrorized, "babies being tear-gassed," and Americans being targeted for little more than "having an accent or whatever." It was a story designed to provoke outrage — and one that Democrats' obstruction has helped make plausible.

Kimmel went further, misrepresenting key facts surrounding the shooting of Renee Good, weaving partial truths into a broader fiction that framed the incident as emblematic of lawless tyranny. The Department of Homeland Security's own missteps — prematurely labeling cases as acts of domestic terrorism — made that narrative easier to sell. But Kimmel's conclusion was not limited to those failures. It amounted to a rejection of immigration enforcement itself.

Equally misleading was his suggestion that this chaos is unfolding everywhere. It is not. The disturbances are concentrated in blue cities that refuse to cooperate with ICE. In red cities, where cooperation exists, enforcement occurs quietly and without spectacle.

For voters trying to assess the situation honestly, the dynamic is deeply frustrating. State and local officials obstruct federal law, enforcement becomes riskier and more visible, and then federal agents are blamed when things go wrong. Public opinion, however, does not pause for nuance. As CNN analyst Harry Enten recently noted, ICE's approval ratings have sharply declined.

That political reality has now forced the administration to recalibrate. Border czar Tom Homan — long viewed as the most disciplined and clear-eyed voice on enforcement — has been put front and center. From the beginning, Homan has emphasized investigations, lawful process, and deescalation where possible. He has often appeared to be the adult in the room.

Whether that recalibration succeeds will depend in large part on Minnesota's leaders and Minneapolis officials. Democrats clearly sense momentum. They believe obstruction is paying dividends. That belief should give pause.

History offers a warning. In 2020, police were vilified, departments were defunded, and law enforcement briefly became politically radioactive. Then crime surged, public opinion snapped back, and Democrats found themselves underwater on policing for years.

Minneapolis may follow the same trajectory. Democrats may win the immediate battle — turning ICE into a temporary villain and shifting attention away from illegal immigration. But in doing so, they risk losing the war. When consequences arrive, voters tend to remember who dismantled enforcement, not who defended it.