All Quiet on the Western (Mississippi) Front?

For at least a couple of hours, Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota governor Tim Walz did their level best to provoke a riot in the Twin Cities. In the immediate aftermath of a shooting during an immigration-enforcement operation, Frey declared that ICE had murdered a woman and screeched that ICE should “get the f*** out of Minneapolis.” Walz declared that Homeland Security had lied about the incident, promised to use the National Guard to thwart federal authority, and at least suggested that the state had “gone to war” against the federal government.

Initially, it appeared that Frey and Walz would get the riot they attempted to incite. A mob showed up and attacked a federal building, a scene that also played out in Seattle, Sacramento, San Francisco, and Milwaukee. However, the protest evolved into something a little more peaceful overnight, at least in initial reporting:

Protestors are continuing demonstrations on Thursday, after a woman was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis.

Demonstrations have been planned as early as 7 a.m. Thursday, with a march against ICE expected to start at the Whipple Building in St. Paul. Additional demonstrations are also expected to take place across the Twin Cities.

Meanwhile, in Minneapolis, dozens are still gathered at 34th Street and Portland Avenue on Thursday, where a woman was shot and killed by an ICE agent on Wednesday morning.

The intersection has since been blocked off by demonstrators who have constructed makeshift barricades blocking some roadways, as well as a vigil for 37-year-old Renee Good, the woman who was killed.

At least Minneapolis isn’t burning. Nearly six years ago, Minneapolis exploded over the death of George Floyd while in police custody, when protests during the day turned into riots and several days of destruction overnight. Cooler heads apparently prevailed, at least for now.

Or did panicked heads prevail? Not long after pouring gasoline on a fire, Walz apparently had second thoughts about the implications of his earlier statements:

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Tim Walz just said he’s terrified President Trump has the power to invoke the INSURRECTION ACT in Minnesota

He’s begging Democrats not to riot and “take the bait”

“Don’t allow them to deploy federal troops or invoke the Insurrection Act, or declare martial law!”… pic.twitter.com/moBuU5LzLN

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) January 7, 2026

Even TIM knows how rabid his base is.

Normal people don’t have to worry if they will suddenly launch an assault on law enforcement.

This sequence strongly suggests that Walz realized – belatedly – that he’d just set up a clear predicate for Donald Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act and send federal troops into Minnesota. Trump never took that option in 2020 in any of the riots in American cities, although some Republicans (most notably Tom Cotton) urged him to do so, at least to protect federal properties under attack. The missing element in 2020 was defiance of federal authority by the governments involved, rather than just the protesters.

Walz stepped over that line yesterday by threatening “war” with the federal government and the use of National Guard troops to interfere with federal authority. That would not just be insurrection but outright rebellion, and precisely the reason the Insurrection Act exists. While the Supreme Court recently held that Trump cannot order federalized troops into states and cities under other statutes, they pointedly left open the Insurrection Act and the nearly plenary presidential authority to invoke it:

The object of Presidential action must be “insurrection”, “domestic violence,” “unlawful combination” or “conspiracy” that opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States. The judgment in that regard is exclusively conferred on the President by the language of the statute — “The President … shall take measures as he considers necessary….”

This is a purely “subjective” test — what is in the President’s mind — unlike Sec. 12406 which is an “objective” test as to whether the President is “unable to execute the laws.”

The dispute over his use of Sec. 12406 has largely been whether the President alone is empowered to make the factual judgment, and what judicial review — if any — applies to his decision.

If President Trump elects to continue his policy of aggressive enforcement of immigration law, and wants to provide the DHS/ICE agents with a protective force to safeguard them while they conduct their enforcement operations, the Supreme Court has given him no option other than to use the Insurrection Act.

Walz threatened an insurrection yesterday before attempting to retreat from that boast. If he calls up the National Guard to block ICE enforcement efforts, it will be that and not a riot that will justify a Trump use of the Insurrection Act to federalize the Minnesota National Guard and take control of Minneapolis. And federal courts will have very little choice but to go along with it.

Walz realized that just short of too late. Let’s see whether he’s smart enough for that realization to stick. In the meantime, Jonathan Turley explained this morning why Walz and Frey were talking out of their asses all day yesterday in assessing the video and the shooting. Maybe lawyers in Minnesota can use small words to explain this to Walz, and crayons to explain it to the potty-mouth mayor of Minneapolis.

“The courts do not second guess these split second decisions. They look at whether an officer can reasonably believe that he was in danger.”

Fox News Contributor and George Washington University Law Professor @JonathanTurley speaking with @foxandfriends.

via #StudiGo mobile… pic.twitter.com/KW1A77i1aw

— StudiGo (@StudiGo_LLC) January 8, 2026