Updated

Updated · The New York Times · Jul 31

Judge Seeks Grand Jury Transcripts in 40-Defendant Minnesota Protest Case as Misconduct Claims Mount

Updated

Updated · The New York Times · Jul 31

Judge Seeks Grand Jury Transcripts in 40-Defendant Minnesota Protest Case as Misconduct Claims Mount

Q: Why did prosecutors resort to unusual administrative subpoenas after judges rejected their search warrants in the Minnesota protest case?

Prosecutors appear to have turned to administrative subpoenas because their conventional evidence-gathering efforts were failing in court. Judges in Minnesota rejected or questioned several search-warrant applications, saying the affidavits did not adequately show probable cause or explain how the requested account data would likely reveal criminal activity. Some requests also raised press-freedom and Privacy Protection Act concerns because they targeted journalists’ materials and subscriber information. According to defense filings and related reporting, investigators then used administrative subpoenas—tools more commonly associated with civil or customs enforcement—to obtain information after those warrant efforts were denied, withdrawn, or weakened. In practical terms, the subpoenas offered another route to collect records without meeting the same judicial threshold required for a criminal search warrant. That is why the subpoenas have drawn scrutiny. Defense lawyers argue the government used them as a workaround after judges blocked standard warrants, and they question whether those authorities were appropriate in an ordinary criminal case. The broader issue raised in court is whether investigators, lacking sufficient probable-cause support for warrants, relied on less typical legal tools to keep gathering evidence.

2 articles · Updated · The New York Times · Jul 31

Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko ordered grand jury transcripts reviewed after defense lawyers argued prosecutors may have used false statements to indict activists and journalists over a Jan. 18 church protest in St. Paul.
The scrutiny centers on claims that investigators wrongly said reporter Georgia Fort shouted anti-ICE slogans and used her camera as a weapon; Micko said there was some evidence prosecutors may have "misinstructed" the grand jury.
The case has already been weakened by earlier setbacks, including a judge's rejection of multiple search warrants, a disputed cellphone warrant involving Don Lemon, and accusations that prosecutors relied on administrative subpoenas instead of proper criminal-process tools.
Prosecutors say any mistakes were accidental and the case is proceeding normally, but they have offered misdemeanor plea deals to 29 of nearly 40 defendants, with no takers so far.
The St. Paul prosecution has become a broader test of Trump-era immigration enforcement cases, several of which have unraveled in cities including Chicago and Los Angeles over thin evidence or prosecutorial errors.