Department of Justice prosecutors across the United States have suffered a series of embarrassing defeats in their aggressive pursuit of criminal cases against protesters and immigrants, with many cases dismissed or ending in not guilty verdicts. In several high-profile instances, prosecutions collapsed because they relied on statements by Department of Homeland Security officers that lacked supporting evidence or were proven false by video footage.
The most recent significant fumble came from Minneapolis prosecutors, who last week dismissed felony assault charges against two Venezuelan men accused of violently beating an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer with weapons on 14 January. The DHS had described the men as 'violent criminal illegal aliens', but prosecutors later said 'newly discovered evidence is materially inconsistent with the allegations'. The motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice, meaning the government cannot re-file charges.
ICE director Todd Lyons acknowledged that an investigation was opened after videos revealed 'sworn testimony provided by two separate officers appears to have made untruthful statements'. Frederick Goetz, a lawyer for one of the men, said it was 'very unusual for the government to move to dismiss its own case with prejudice' and noted a pattern of unreasonable force by ICE agents followed by false narratives to justify it.
Goetz warned of reputational harm to his client, stating that the allegation of attacking a federal officer 'is going to live forever on the internet'. He also criticised the high volume of similar charges tied to the immigration crackdown, saying it overwhelms federal courts and diverts resources from complex fraud, drug and gang matters, concluding that 'public safety has not been served' by these cases.
