COVERAGE "Under Siege: Minneapolis in Crisis"

Eric Newmark is a defense attorney based in the Twin Cities, where he has practiced law for 25 years. His work places him at the intersection of legal principle, the rule of law, and lived reality. We wanted to hear from him because he understands Minnesota’s civic and institutional landscape and because he was the defense attorney in an earlier December court case involving Jonathan Ross, the federal immigration agent who shot Rene Good on January 7 in South Minneapolis.In that earlier case, Newmark represented the defendant, who was accused of dragging Jonathan Ross during an immigration traffic stop back in June. Ross was one of the agents who approached a car driven by Carlos Munoz-Guatemala, an undocumented Mexican immigrant, and asked him to lower his window. Munoz-Guatemala allegedly only partially opened his window, and immigration officials used a tool to break a rear window to reach forward and unlock the door. Munoz-Guatemala allegedly put the car in drive and pulled forward with Ross’s arm still inside the vehicle. Ross was reportedly dragged at least 50 yards with his arm pinned inside the car and required 20 stitches. Munoz-Guatemala, who had been charged with sexually abusing a minor in 2022, was found guilty in the dragging case and is in jail.Newmark said he quickly realized that Ross was the same agent involved in that case when Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said the federal agent who shot Rene Good was an officer who had been dragged in June.SAY WHAT? Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.In this compelling discussion, Newmark discusses what he learned about Ross in that case, as well as the current tense situation in Minneapolis, where the federal law enforcement presence continues to escalate. Michele and Eric explore the implications of this occupation, the question of whether federal agents actually have “absolute immunity” as the administration suggests, and the broader impact on community trust and safety. The conversation delves into the historical context of policing in the city, highlighting the ongoing struggle for reform and justice in the wake of the George Floyd murder and other high-profile police shootings. This conversation offers a critical examination of the current state of affairs and the challenges faced by residents and local authorities alike. Take a listen and let us know what you think. ~~~Note: We spoke to Eric Newmark before the Department of Justice decided to file charges against Minnesota Gov Tim Walz and and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Fridy evening for alleging impeding law enforcementABOVE “What we’re seeing in Minneapolis is essentially our entire city is under siege, under occupation.”Key Points:* The question of absolute immunity. * How current federal immigration tactics collide with police reforms that followed the killing of George Floyd.* The erosion of community trust when the “official” explanation is undermined by video evidence.“You have the absolute First Amendment right to use your cell phone to record anything you see in public. You have the right to blow your whistle. You have the right to warn your neighbors that ICE is in the area.”Key Points:* The laws that govern peaceful protest and public assembly.* The laws that govern cooperation with federal immigration agents.* The difference in the scope of work for federal immigration agents and local law enforcement.“I think Minneapolis and St Paul and Minnesota are being used as an example for everyone else to see ‘’here’s what happens when you don’t comply. Here’s what happens when you don’t vote for the president in three straight elections, or when your leaders fight back”Key Points:* The parameters for enacting marital law or invoking the Insurrection Act.* The concern that the protest could spill over into violence.* The question of whether Minnesota’s large business community will weigh in on the danger and disruptions throughout the state. (17 Fortune 500 companies are based in Minnesota).“If he was having some issues related to that incident that happened in June, he shouldn’t have been on the street. He shouldn’t have been carrying a weapon.”Key Points:* The intent to file additional motions before sentencing to ask for additional discovery that would explain the federal officer’s training and scope of mission.* Are federal agents trained to de-escalate tense crowd situations?* Concern among state lawyers about the road ahead and upholding the law when the guardrails around constitutional and legal parameters are being warped. Get full access to Say What? with Michele Norris at michelenorris.substack.com/subscribe