Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has greenlit a significant expansion of federal support for immigration enforcement in the Twin Cities, sparking renewed debate over the administration’s approach.

On Monday, Hegseth approved a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) request to utilize space at Fort Snelling, a historic decommissioned military base near Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport, for housing federal agents, vehicles, weapons, and aircraft as part of ongoing immigration sweeps by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The base, already home to an ICE field office and a DHS detention processing center, will provide infrastructure on a U.S. Army Reserve site for parking 300-500 vehicles, storing munitions, and operating air assets. This move comes amid nearly four weeks of controversial operations in the region.

The issue has ignited fierce debate, with local and state officials urging President Trump to halt the crackdown while some prominent Republican figures question the administration’s goals in Minneapolis.

Escalating Tensions in Twin Cities Enforcement

These immigration sweeps, initially framed by the administration as a response to alleged fraud at daycare centers run by Somali residents, have turned increasingly contentious. Federal agents have been met with protests, leading to tragic outcomes, including the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens monitoring enforcement actions.

Just days ago, 1,500 active-duty soldiers were placed on standby for potential deployment to Minneapolis, signaling a possible manpower surge to counter mounting unrest. Early Monday, reports emerged that Trump’s “border czar,” Tom Homan, was dispatched to oversee operations directly. It’s clear the administration isn’t backing down anytime soon.

DHS’s request for Fort Snelling’s infrastructure, detailed in an email obtained by the Chronicle, paints a picture of a sprawling operation:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) requests support from the Department of War (DoW) to provide existing infrastructure to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component of DHS, specifically an area for parking approximately 300-500 vehicles and 10 storage trailers, a ready room space for approximal 500-800 CBP personnel, a space to house, maintain and operate five CBP Air Assets, access to a magazine to store munitions, and other necessary facilities to support operations in the Minneapolis, Minnesota metropolitan area

Well, if that’s not a full-scale mobilization, what is?

Fort Snelling’s Strategic Role in Operations

The email further justifies the request by emphasizing operational necessity:

This infrastructure support is critical for the efficient and secure command, control, and coordination of these operations, ensuring compliance with federal regulations, and advancing DHS's public safety and national security objectives.

But let’s be honest—when federal agents are clashing with protesters and booking hotel rooms under siege, a fortified base starts looking like a necessity, not a luxury.

Fort Snelling itself carries a heavy historical weight, once used to imprison Native Americans in the 1800s, and now managed by a mix of federal, local, and state historical entities. Its location next to a major airport and its existing DHS facilities make it a logical hub. Yet, one wonders if this choice will only pour fuel on the already blazing public discontent.

The tragic shooting of Alex Pretti, a nurse, by DHS agents on Saturday after reportedly disarming him of a handgun, underscores the volatile nature of these operations. Protesters targeting hotels housing agents may have pushed DHS to seek the relative safety of a military facility. It’s a grim reminder that enforcement at this scale often comes with unintended, heartbreaking costs.

Public Backlash and Policy Questions

Critics of the operation argue it’s an overreach, with state and local leaders pleading for de-escalation. Even within Republican circles, there’s unease about the long-term objectives in Minneapolis. Is this about law enforcement or sending a broader message?

The administration, citing two presidential proclamations and executive orders from last year, seems to view this as a cornerstone of national security policy. But when military bases are repurposed and soldiers are on standby, it’s hard not to question if the cure is becoming worse than the ailment.

Looking at precedents in cities like Oakland, where troops have guarded federal facilities against protesters, it’s plausible DHS is also prioritizing Fort Snelling to shield operations near a critical transport hub. Security is paramount, sure, but at what point does militarization alienate the very communities it claims to protect?