- A federal judge dissolved a restraining order that prevented DHS from altering evidence in a fatal shooting.
- The court determined federal agencies are unlikely to destroy evidence related to the death of Alex Pretti.
- State officials maintain that federal agents blocked access to the scene and the shooting remains under investigation.
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA — U.S. District Judge Eric C. Tostrud dissolved a temporary restraining order on February 2, 2026, lifting a federal court bar that had prevented the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and related agencies from destroying or altering evidence connected to the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents.
Tostrud’s order removes the emergency restrictions he imposed on January 24, 2026, but it does not resolve the broader lawsuit, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension v. Noem, which remains pending in federal court.
The dissolved order had enjoined DHS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection, and others from “destroying or altering evidence related to the fatal shooting involving federal officers,” including materials removed from the scene or held in exclusive custody.
“no longer needed because DHS appeared unlikely to destroy or improperly alter the evidence.”
Tostrud said the temporary restraining order was “no longer needed because DHS appeared unlikely to destroy or improperly alter the evidence.” The decision addressed only the emergency evidence-preservation dispute at the temporary restraining order stage, not the underlying claims about access to the scene and the conduct of agents.
The case grew out of a shooting that occurred the same day Tostrud issued the TRO, at 26th Street and Nicollet Avenue in Minneapolis. The lawsuit, Case No. 0:26-cv-00628-ECT-DTS, was filed hours after the 9:30 a.m. shooting of the 37-year-old U.S. citizen Alex Jeffrey Pretti.
Filings describe Pretti as an ICU nurse at a Veterans Affairs hospital with no criminal record beyond traffic violations and as a lawful gun owner. The rapid court fight followed assertions from state and county officials that federal agents took control of the scene and limited access for state investigators in the immediate aftermath.
Plaintiffs Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), represented by the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, sued DHS and officials including U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. They alleged that federal agents blocked state investigators from the scene even after a search warrant at 11:54 a.m., then left hours later, collapsing the perimeter and risking evidence spoilage.
BCA Superintendent Drew Evans said in a sworn declaration that in over 20 years, he had “never before encountered federal authorities blocking the agency’s access to an incident where both federal and state jurisdiction applied.”
“never before encountered federal authorities blocking the agency’s access to an incident where both federal and state jurisdiction applied.”
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison framed the state’s position as a rule-of-law and evidence-preservation dispute, saying, “Federal agents are not above the law and Alex Pretti is certainly not beneath it.” Ellison called it “uncharted territory” and an “extraordinary” step, adding, “I don’t care if you’re conservative, liberal or whatever, but you should at least be in favor of conserving evidence in a homicide.”
“Federal agents are not above the law and Alex Pretti is certainly not beneath it.”
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said her office intended to evaluate whether federal agents committed crimes, stating, “Our office has jurisdiction to review this matter for potential criminal conduct by the federal agents involved and we will do so.”
“Our office has jurisdiction to review this matter for potential criminal conduct by the federal agents involved and we will do so.”
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz criticized federal actions as “closing the crime scene, sweeping away the evidence, defying a court order,” calling it “an inflection point in America” and federal accounts “lies.” Federal officials rejected the premise that agents would mishandle evidence and disputed how the encounter should be characterized.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem described Pretti’s actions as “an act of domestic terrorism,” claiming he approached with a loaded 9-millimeter handgun and two magazines, and that DHS followed “exact same protocols. just like we did under the entire Trump administration.” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called evidence destruction claims “a ridiculous attempt to divide the American people” and “an absurd attempt to create division. and divert attention from the fact that our law enforcement officers were assaulted.”
The Pretti family pushed back on DHS accounts of the encounter, calling federal claims “reprehensible and disgusting,” and saying video showed him with “his phone in his right hand and his empty left hand raised above his head.” Their statement became part of a fast-moving dispute over whether physical and video evidence supports federal descriptions of what agents saw and why they used force.
DHS portrayed Pretti as arriving “to cause maximum harm” and intending to “kill law enforcement,” while holding a weapon. In contrast, bystander videos show him holding a phone while helping a woman pushed to the ground, then being pepper-sprayed, wrestled down, and shot, with no visible weapon.
The shooting drew additional scrutiny because it occurred during a period of heightened enforcement activity and unrest in Minneapolis tied to President Trump‘s immigration crackdown. It was the second U.S. citizen killed by federal agents during Minneapolis protests against that crackdown and the third shooting involving federal immigration agents there in January 2026.
Tostrud’s decision to dissolve the TRO turned on his assessment that an emergency court order was no longer necessary to prevent harm. His ruling that DHS appeared unlikely to destroy or improperly alter evidence removed the basis for extraordinary, short-term relief, while leaving intact the broader fight over competing jurisdictional claims, access to evidence, and the sequence of events at the scene.
The dissolution does not foreclose other court requests in Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension v. Noem, and it does not determine whether any federal or state officials acted unlawfully. The underlying litigation continues, with the dispute centered on what authority state investigators had at the scene and what obligations federal agencies had to preserve and share evidence.
The clash unfolded amid Operation Metro Surge, described as deploying up to 3,000 federal agents to Minnesota in what was called the largest immigration enforcement operation ever. The operation focused on fraud investigations tied to the Feeding Our Future scheme, while critics alleged it targeted people based on race or ethnicity and punished sanctuary policies.
A separate lawsuit, Case 0:26-cv-00190, challenges Operation Metro Surge. Hennepin County, in the wake of the shooting and the competing accounts of what unfolded, has also sought public evidence submissions through its portal.
