Donald Trump has escalated tensions in Minnesota after publicly threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act, a rarely used federal law that allows a president to deploy active duty military forces inside the United States.
Trump issued the warning as protests continued in Minneapolis following violent encounters involving federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Demonstrations erupted after the fatal shooting of Renee Good and the nonfatal shooting of a Venezuelan man during separate encounters with ICE officers, incidents that sparked days of unrest and clashes with law enforcement.
In a public statement, Trump said he would invoke the Insurrection Act if Minnesota leaders failed to stop what he described as violent unrest and attacks on federal agents. He framed the protests as an insurrection and warned that federal intervention would “quickly put an end” to the situation.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz responded by urging calm and de-escalation. Walz publicly called on the federal government to lower the temperature, stressing that Minnesota officials were working to restore order while protecting the right to peaceful protest. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey also addressed the situation, emphasizing the need for stability and signaling a shift toward restoring calm after several nights of confrontation in the city.
U.S. Representative Betty McCollum of Minnesota released a statement rejecting Trump’s threat to invoke the Insurrection Act. McCollum said deploying the military would further inflame tensions and undermine local efforts to stabilize the community following the shootings.
The Insurrection Act, enacted in 1807, grants sweeping authority to the president to use military force during domestic unrest. It has been used sparingly throughout U.S. history, most often during extreme crises involving civil disorder.
Trump’s threat places the law back into national focus and raises serious questions about executive power, civil liberties, and the role of the military in responding to domestic protests. Whether he follows through or not, the warning alone has intensified scrutiny around federal enforcement tactics and the handling of civil unrest.
