DOJ Investigates Whether ICE Agents Lied About Shooting Venezuelan Man in Minnesota

Federal authorities have opened a criminal investigation into whether two Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers lied under oath about a January shooting by ICE agents in Minneapolis, a case that has raised fresh questions about accountability, transparency and law enforcement credibility amid a controversial immigration enforcement surge in the city.

The probe was announced Friday by ICE Director Todd Lyons, who confirmed that video evidence contradicts sworn testimony provided by the officers about the Jan. 14 incident in north Minneapolis in which one Venezuelan man was shot in the leg. The two unnamed officers are now on administrative leave while federal prosecutors and the Justice Department investigate whether they made “untruthful statements” under oath.

A federal judge dismissed all felony charges against the two Venezuelan men involved, Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna and Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, after prosecutors acknowledged that the government’s narrative was undermined by evidence that conflicted with earlier claims. In a rare move, the dismissal was ordered with prejudice, meaning the charges cannot be refiled.

Operation Metro Surge and Rising Scrutiny

The Minneapolis shooting is one of several incidents during the Trump administration’s Operation Metro Surge, a federal immigration crackdown that has deployed thousands of armed agents to the Twin Cities since late 2025. The aggressive enforcement effort has drawn intense public scrutiny following a sequence of violent federal encounters, including the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Renée Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration officers earlier this year.

In the Jan. 14 confrontation, federal court filings indicate ICE officers mistakenly targeted the wrong vehicle based on a license plate scan, leading to a pursuit that ended near an apartment where Sosa-Celes was present. The government’s original account claimed that Sosa-Celes and Aljorna attacked an ICE agent with a broom handle and snow shovel, prompting the officer to fire in self-defense. But the FBI affidavit later revealed that the alleged attackers dropped their makeshift weapons and were fleeing when the officer shot Sosa-Celes in the thigh.

The government’s motion to dismiss noted the inconsistencies between the initial claims and later evidence, prompting the judge to order the charges dropped. Attorneys for the men celebrated the outcome, saying their clients were “overjoyed” that the case had been dismissed and that justice was served.

Reactions from Lawyers, Advocates and Officials

Civil rights advocates and immigration lawyers argue that the episode highlights systemic issues in how federal agents handle enforcement and justify use of force. Brian D. Clark, attorney for Aljorna and Sosa-Celes, sharply criticized the government’s handling, stating that the case was built on “lies by an ICE agent who recklessly shot into their home through a closed door.” He urged prosecutors to release the name of the officer and consider criminal charges.

Some legal observers see the probe into officers’ testimony as an unusual escalation in accountability. “Federal law enforcement lying under oath not only undermines the integrity of the justice system but also erodes public trust at a time when questions about ICE’s tactics are already heightened,” said one attorney familiar with law enforcement oversight, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

While the Department of Justice declined to comment on the ongoing probe, Minnesota officials have publicly expressed concern about federal immigration enforcement operations. Earlier this month a judge halted the deportation of a Venezuelan woman who witnessed the shooting, acknowledging that her testimony could be critical to unraveling what happened.

Community Impact and Political Fallout

The Minneapolis incidents have ignited protests, fueled partisan debates and drawn national attention to the role of armed federal immigration agents in domestic law enforcement. Residents, community leaders and civil liberties groups have criticized what they see as militarized tactics and insufficient transparency from ICE and the Department of Homeland Security.

A recent poll found that public opinion on ICE remains deeply divided, with a majority of Americans disapproving of the agency’s performance while Republicans largely support its expanded role, underscoring the political tensions surrounding immigration enforcement.

For the Venezuelan men, dismissal of charges ends the immediate legal threat but does not resolve broader questions about deportation, due process and federal accountability. Defense attorneys have said they will continue pushing for transparency, including the release of body-cam footage and full disclosure of ICE protocols in use of force situations when civilians are present.

Originally published on Latin Times