Federal Authority Prevails:

ICE's Lawful Enforcement in Minnesota Amid Walz's Unconstitutional Threats

In a firm defense of law and order, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Minneapolis are upholding their constitutional duty to enforce federal immigration laws, despite Minnesota Governor Tim Walz's reckless threats to deploy the state's National Guard against them. This crisis, triggered by a justified self-defense shooting on January 7, 2026, highlights the U.S. Constitution's clear supremacy of federal power over state meddling.

ICE's Justified Actions and the Incident

ICE was executing operations under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good tried to ram agents with her vehicle on a snowy street. An agent fired in self-defense, averting harm to officers and others, a response aligned with Fourth Amendment standards on use of force, permitting deadly action against imminent threats, as upheld by legal precedents.

Immigration enforcement is a federal exclusive under Article I, Section 8, granting Congress authority over naturalization and borders. The Supremacy Clause in Article VI overrides conflicting state actions, rendering ICE's work immune to local interference. Walz's stance disregards this, exacerbating issues in a state facing federal probes into welfare fraud linked to immigrant groups.

Walz's Reckless Escalation: Challenging Federal Supremacy

On January 8, Walz issued a "warning order" to the 13,000-strong Minnesota National Guard for potential deployment to "protect public safety" during protests. His declaration, "We do not need any further help from the federal government", casts ICE as adversaries, defying constitutional power divisions. This echoes past state rebellions crushed by presidents.

Fresh off announcing no reelection bid amid fraud scandals, Walz's positioning of state troops against federal agents obstructs the president's Article II mandate to faithfully execute laws, potentially sparking the "insurrection" he purports to avoid.

GOP Leaders Demand Constitutional Enforcement

Republican lawmakers demand swift action. Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) called for Trump to "Invoke the Insurrection Act. Arrest Tim Walz", labeling it obstruction. Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI) compared it to Fort Sumter, equating state militia moves to civil war. Reps. Rich McCormick (R-GA) and Nancy Mace (R-SC) stressed Trump's role as Commander in Chief, with federal authority trumping state objections.

The 1807 Insurrection Act allows presidents to deploy forces to quell rebellion or enforce laws sans state approval. Used over 30 times, including by Eisenhower and Kennedy to federalize Guards against desegregation blockers, Trump can apply it here to commandeer Minnesota's Guard, safeguard ICE, and halt Walz's threats.

Strong Public Backing for ICE

On X, support for ICE surges, with users branding Walz's actions "insurrection" and "treason". @socalartgal3 and veteran @defense_f3 demand Insurrection Act use to defend federal law. @MaLiKyEEsWoRlD exposes hypocrisy in vilifying ICE while protecting suspects, affirming immigration as federal domain.

Protests have grown violent with damage and anti-ICE vandalism, but officials justify ICE reinforcements as vital for fraud busts and border security, rooted in constitutional national sovereignty.

Enforcing Law to Preserve Unity

As of January 11, 2026, no deployment has happened, but this tests constitutional bounds. ICE's role is essential to shield communities from fraud and illegal immigration. Walz's rebellion recalls 1788's federal debates and 1865's Civil War verdict: Federal power must dominate for national cohesion.

Trump should activate the Insurrection Act, federalize the Guard, and secure ICE's operations. This is duty, not excess, averting conflict and upholding that no governor undermines U.S. laws.

Michael J Badagliacco, "MJB"