‘We are a whisper away from Jim Crow’: Minnesota's top prosecutor sounds alarm

When President Donald Trump’s performance in the polls in 2024 signaled a possible re-election, Keith Ellison and fellow Democratic attorneys general read Project 2025 and started getting ready, especially when Trump hired the key author of the planning document after his election.

They divided the documents into sections and marshaled their staff lawyers to be ready with lawsuits.

So when Russell Vought and the Office of Management and Budget froze the distribution of certain federal funds — as outlined in Project 2025 — Ellison and other the Democratic AGs were ready.

They sued over the funding freeze the next day.

“They were not hiding the ball,” Ellison said in a wide-ranging interview with States Newsroom in Minneapolis Wednesday.

Ellison and his colleagues have engaged in more than two dozen lawsuits against Trump administration actions in the first five months of the president’s second term. The AGs have sued over cuts to federal agencies, tariffs, DOGE’s access to government data, attempts to end birthright citizenship, and more.

They’ve also toured blue states to tout their accomplishments and listen to voters’ concerns.

The stakes are high, Ellison said: the fate of multi-racial democracy.

Ellison, who served for a dozen years in Congress representing Minnesota’s Minneapolis-based 5th District, said the states are a sovereign bulwark against federal power grabs.

The Democratic attorneys general are not only fighting a Republican-controlled executive branch, but also a conservative majority on the U.S Supreme Court. In Ellison’s view, recent decisions by the Roberts court — particularly in 303 Creative v. Elenis, in which the court ruled that a business owner could not be obligated to serve a gay couple — signify that the country is moving towards legal segregation.

“We are a whisper away from Jim Crow,” Ellison said.

Still, Ellison was upbeat, celebrating the AGs string of victories and predicting that even conservative Supreme Court justices will resist the Trump administration’s attack on the rule of law and the institution of the court itself.

The Democratic AGs may benefit from a weakened Department of Justice under Trump, Ellison said. The agency that defends the federal government in court is hemorrhaging longtime staff attorneys, through both firings and resignations.

Ellison emphasized that many of the policies enacted by Trump in his first months in office would be legal if they were passed by Congress. Instead, the president is running the country through “edict” and “proclamation,” Ellison said.

“Our democracy is not perfect,” Ellison said, “but you will absolutely miss it when it’s gone, and Trump has given you a glimpse of that.”

Elected Republican tells podcast Jan. 6 protesters were 'actors' in MAGA uniforms

Minnesota Rep. Drew Roach, R-Farmington, and Sen. Bill Lieske, R-Lonsdale, called the Jan. 6 insurrection a “hoax” and repeated a false conspiracy theory that the Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol were “actors,” during a video podcast posted Monday on YouTube and the popular right wing platform Rumble.

Lieske and Roach host a show called “Minnesota Liberty Network.” On Monday, the two discussed the state Senate floor vote on a resolution condemning President Donald Trump’s blanket pardon of the more than 1,500 people charged with crimes related to the Jan. 6. insurrection. Lieske was absent for the vote, and all 22 of the Republicans present voted against the resolution.

“If I would have been there, probably would have ended up voting no. I think that was such a stupid resolution,” Lieske said on the podcast.

Roach then launched into an explanation of why he believes the Jan. 6. was a “hoax.”

“You had people that were actors that were wearing the uniform of the Trump supporter that made it look like they were there to support Donald Trump,” Roach said.

MAGA supporters at the time were upset with mask mandates, Roach said, arguing that because some insurrectionists were wearing masks, “those were not real, true MAGA Donald Trump conservative supporters.”

As evidence for the “hoax” hypothesis, Roach cited the timing of the Capitol breach — while Congress was debating whether to certify the election results in Arizona, which Joe Biden won — and floor speeches made by members of Congress immediately after the riot, all using the word “insurrection.”

“It was all prepared,” Lieske said.

“I had never heard the term insurrection in my life until that day,” Roach said.

He continued: “So you’re telling me you were scared for your life, you were in the basement calling your family, but you were rewriting a new speech? I call bullshit.”

Around 140 law enforcement officers were injured in the insurrection, and more than 1,500 people were charged with crimes ranging from disorderly conduct to carrying a weapon on Capitol grounds and assaulting a law enforcement officer. More than 1,000 pleaded guilty, with 281 cases going to trial.

Among those convicted were 14 members of the far-right organizations Proud Boys and Oath Keepers; members of a Telegram group chat called “PATRIOTS 45 MAGA Gang” who brought tactical gear to the Capitol to “violently remove traitors”; and numerous people who posted on their personal social media accounts or livestreamed while breaching the Capitol.

The U.S. Capitol Police chief testified Tuesday that Trump’s pardons had negative repercussions on morale within the department and for police across the country.

“I think there was an impact, not only to the Capitol Police, but an impact nationwide when you see folks that are pardoned — and I’m really referring to the ones that were convicted of assaulting police officers,” J. Thomas Manger said during a hearing on the department’s budget request.

'The Kite Runner' author hits back after book banned in MN high school

Gov. Tim Walz and his DFL colleagues in the state Legislature have touted a law passed in 2024 that “banned book bans.”

But school districts in Minnesota are still limiting students’ access to books.

In St. Francis, district leaders are relying on an anonymous Florida-based website — with links to the right-wing group Moms for Liberty — to decide which books are appropriate for students, wrote Ryan Fiereck, president of the labor union of St. Francis educators, in a Reformer commentary this week.

The website, booklooks.org, often considers books featuring LGBTQ and Black characters, and those with “controversial religious commentary,” to be inappropriate for students, Fiereck wrote. Any book with a rating higher than ‘3’ on the website is subject to removal from St. Francis shelves if a parent, student or community member complains.

“The Kite Runner” by Khaled Hosseini is among the books banned in St. Francis. The 2003 novel follows Amir, a wealthy Pashtun boy, and his servant/friend Hassan, a member of the ostracized Hazara ethnic minority. When Hassan is attacked and sexually assaulted by neighborhood boys after winning a prized kite for Amir, Amir fails to intervene. Amir later moves to the U.S. with his father to escape the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but returns to his home country as an adult to rescue Hassan’s son from an orphanage.

The novel addresses racial caste systems, sexual assault, theocracy and U.S. foreign policy — themes that have made the book controversial since its release, both in the U.S. and in Afghanistan.

After a community member complained about the book, it was pulled from St. Francis shelves.

Hosseini was born in Kabul in 1965. His father was a diplomat, and his mother a high school English teacher. The family moved to Paris for his father’s job in 1976, and in 1980, after a communist coup and Soviet invasion, the family was granted political asylum in the U.S. Hosseini became a medical doctor in California and wrote “The Kite Runner” — his debut novel — while practicing medicine.

His books, “The Kite Runner,” “A Thousand Splendid Suns,” and “And the Mountains Echoed,” have been published in over 70 countries and sold more than 40 million copies worldwide.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

As a journalist, I should admit that I have a bias here. I read “The Kite Runner” for the first time in middle school — I’m pretty sure I got it off a shelf in my 8th grade English teacher’s classroom — and I loved it. After that, I read your other books, and they’ve all stuck with me. So thank you for that.

[Laughs] That makes me feel old, but thank you very much.

The reasoning for the “Kite Runner” ban in St. Francis has to do with its depiction of sexual violence, particularly the scene where Hassan is assaulted by other boys in an alley. When you were writing the novel, why was it important to include not just physical violence, but sexual violence, as a turning point and recurring theme?

I knew that that pivotal scene in the alley was central to the book, and it’s an act of sexual violence because it’s ultimately an act of imposing your will on another person. And there’s a very clear hierarchy between the people in that alley: the victim is a member of an oppressed minority, and the perpetrator belongs to the majority ethnicity in Afghanistan and belongs to a different socioeconomic background. So there’s a big difference in hierarchy.

When I went to Afghanistan, so many people told me that they felt that Afghanistan did the bidding of the West in the 80s by fighting the Soviet Union, which Ronald Reagan called the “new empire.” And once the purposes of the West were served — meaning once Hassan had won the kite for Amir — the country was then brutalized. Many Afghans used the word “rape” for a long time, while the West sort of looked around the corner into the alley and did nothing. I heard from Afghan people themselves, how they thought about their relationship with the West and how they felt abandoned. They served their purpose, and when the time came, they were abandoned and left to be brutalized.

So it couldn’t just be a beating up. That scene had to be so brutal and so awful that it transformed these characters and haunted them into adulthood.

When this book was first published, did you think it would cause such an uproar 20, 25 years later?

I thought the uproar would be caused within my own community of Afghan readers, because the book touches on taboo subjects. You know, the whole idea of ethnic strife in Afghanistan is a taboo subject. It’s something people don’t speak about openly. It’s sort of like an open secret.

So I thought that my rather naked depiction of ethnic tension in Afghanistan would jar Afghan readers. And it certainly did. I did not expect if I would be banned from, you know, high schools in Florida and Minnesota. That did come as a surprise.

If you were speaking to a parent or a school board member who feels like “The Kite Runner” isn’t appropriate for middle or high school students, what would you say to them?

I would tell them that I’ve been hearing from high school students for the better part of 20 years, both in-person in high schools, where I have met them across the country, and also in letters that they have sent me themselves in their own words. I would tell the school board that there’s an enormous disconnect between the objections raised by the so-called “concerned parents” and the experiences of the students who are actually reading the book — because the students tell me what reading “The Kite Runner” meant for them, and, quite poignantly, tell me what impact it made on them. How the book encouraged them to stand up to bullies and defy intolerance; how the book’s tagline, which is, “there’s a way to be good again,” inspired some of them to volunteer, to look inward, to try to be better people, amend broken ties with people they had hurt; how “The Kite Runner” gave them a more nuanced and maybe a more human and compassionate perspective on Afghanistan and its people and everything that they had to endure.

I would tell the board that when these letters close, the students express gratitude to the book for these new insights. I would tell the board that the notion that somehow this book is harmful to students — when the response from teachers and students themselves is so overwhelmingly positive and enthusiastic — is quite a bewildering notion.

Are there any particular interactions with students who have read “The Kite Runner” that have stuck with you?

There are many. Students have walked up to me at talks and told me that they were sexually abused and that reading the book was difficult, but it helped them heal in some way. They tell me that they were afraid of their parents, or they had a strained relationship with their father, or with their mother, and that Amir’s struggles with his father helped them evaluate their own relationships.

They tell me that they knew nothing about Muslims, that they knew nothing about Afghanistan, and that the book helped them understand a part of the world in a better way. Every person reads a book differently, and it’s remarkable how many students have told me that in very specific, personal ways in which the book has affected them. But the ones that really stay with me are the ones from the kids who told me that they were bullied, and they see in the characters Hassan and Amir a sort of reflection of themselves.

Have you ever had someone come up to you and say they regret reading it?

That has never happened.

I guess that would be a weird thing to say to an author. [Laughs]

It would be. I have had people say, ”I wish I hadn’t read this book because I cried for six hours and it ruined my whole Saturday.” [Laughs.] No, in all seriousness, that’s never happened.

On BookLooks, the website used by St. Francis to determine which books are subject to a ban, the reason for the high rating of “The Kite Runner” is it’s depiction of sexual violence. But how much of the “Kite Runner” bans generally do you think are really about the sexual violence? Do you think there’s something bigger going on with why this book is being banned so frequently?

What they say is that this is about protecting children, which I find is dishonest, because I think the book ban movement — and let’s face it, the St. Francis situation with this website, they say it’s not a book ban, but it really is — it really has little to do with protecting children. It has everything to do with targeting books with diverse viewpoints that may not be in line with the reviewers’ political or religious beliefs

And it has to do with a gradual and deliberate merging of educational policy and partisan politics. So this website, Booklooks in St. Francis, does not rely on the expertise of librarians and instructors, but it relies on the subjective opinion of so-called “concerned parents” who comb the books for material that they personally find objectionable based on some kind of narrow ideological litmus test, which often leans heavily on the conservative side. So I think to say this is to protect children is a guise for instead, advanced and narrow political ideology.

Last one. What’s one good book you’ve read lately?

Can I give you a couple?

Sure, I’ll take a couple.

I’m in the process of reading a book that was gifted to me called “Far From the Tree” by Andrew Solomon.

I had never read “In Cold Blood” by Truman Capote…I was just blown away. It’s an amazing piece of writing. And I also read ”Slouching Towards Bethlehem” by Joan Didion recently, a series of wonderful essays about life in California and all the things she’s interested in.

Revealed: Walz struggled to deal with unrest after police violence

Reporting Highlights

  • Behind the Scenes: Democrats portray Gov. Tim Walz as a progressive hero. Republicans call him an extremist. Emails obtained by ProPublica and the Minnesota Reformer suggest he is neither.
  • Unavoidable Compromise: In 2021, police accountability activists pushed Walz for reform. Senate Republicans pushed back. Few people were satisfied with the result.
  • Law and Order: Former President Donald Trump says Walz was slow to respond to unrest. But after police killed Daunte Wright, Walz was criticized for being too heavy-handed.

These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.

In the spring of 2021, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz faced multiple crises.

The trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd was coming to a close. As the one-year anniversary of Floyd’s death approached, authorities were preparing for the kind of unrest that had damaged or destroyed long stretches of the city in 2020. Meanwhile, a package of police reform bills was stalled in the divided Minnesota state Legislature.

Then, on April 11, 2021, a police officer shot and killed 20-year-old Daunte Wright during a traffic stop in the northern Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Center, touching off a fresh round of protests, clashes with the police, and criticism of Walz after he sent in hundreds of officers and armored vehicles that had been readied in anticipation of the trial’s aftermath.

In the midst of all this, Walz still saw an opening to bring police reform to Minnesota and provide a national model for systemic change. He feared the 2021 session would be his last, best chance to do so. But he told the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who made repeated trips to Minneapolis during the upheaval after Floyd’s death, that local politics were getting in the way.

“I wish I could report more on our progress,” Walz told Jackson in a call transcribed by a staff member. “Both you and President Obama mentioned that Minnesota should be the state that could get this right. That’s a responsibility that we have in Minnesota.”

The clamorous close of the 2021 legislative session, and Walz’s role in trying to enact police reform in response to the police killings of Floyd and Wright, plays out in a cache of thousands of internal emails from the Walz administration obtained by ProPublica and the Minnesota Reformer. The emails were requested that summer by independent journalist Tony Webster, but the administration only recently finished turning them over. Webster shared them with the news organizations.

Though the emails are limited, covering about 11 weeks from April to June 2021, they provide a closer, more detailed look at how Walz tried to leverage his influence on the legislative process. They reveal a politician who seems to be a careful listener in one-on-one conversations with grieving mothers and Black activists, freely giving out his personal cellphone number and invitations to the governor’s mansion.

And they show how Walz struggled to balance the need for order in the streets against his credibility with activist allies, while simultaneously trying to bridge the ideological divide between progressives in his party and pro-law-enforcement conservatives.

“He likes being liked,” former state Rep. Patrick Garofalo, a Republican, said of how Walz operates. “He’s thinking about political survival, and it’s nothing more complicated than that. The guy’s not an ideologue.”

Since Vice President Kamala Harris selected Walz to be her running mate, the governor has rocketed to national prominence, praised by Democrats for his progressive “Midwestern dad” image while labeled a “dangerously liberal extremist” who wants to defund the police by Harris’ opponent, former President Donald Trump. Walz has never advocated defunding the police.

The Trump campaign has also tried to cast Walz’s response to the 2020 unrest as weak and ineffectual, despite the fact that, at the time, Trump praised Walz for deploying the National Guard, calling it a “beautiful thing to watch.”

In the end, Walz emerged from the 2021 special legislative session with a compromise bill on police reform that seemingly satisfied no one. For some Democrats, it didn’t go far enough. Many called the bill a disappointment. Some Republicans felt it went too far. The next year, facing reelection, Walz received no major law enforcement endorsements.

“He is not a radical,” said Michelle Phelps, a University of Minnesota sociology professor and author of “The Minneapolis Reckoning.” “He is, I think, a sort of a vanguard of what a more progressive, but still centrist, liberal Democratic wing of the party could look like.”

In response to questions, Teddy Tschann, a spokesperson for Walz, said in a statement that the governor “is committed to bringing people with different views and backgrounds together to find common ground and get things done.”

After Wright was killed, as demonstrations escalated outside the Brooklyn Center police station, texts streamed into Walz’s phone.

“Can you please get those cops out of there and send in the national guard?” one Democratic lawmaker texted him.

That night residents, protesters and journalists in Brooklyn Center met with members of Operation Safety Net, an aggressive coalition of Minnesota National Guard soldiers, state troopers and local police who used tear gas and flash-bangs to clear the streets. A prominent union leader texted Walz less than 24 hours later: “Escalating with tanks and national guard is not helping. You can calm the situation, but this isn’t the way.”

An attorney representing 30 national and local media organizations would later write to Walz with a detailed list of documented abuses the group said journalists were subjected to at the hands of law enforcement, warning that the state agencies under Walz’s control seemed to have no regard for the First Amendment.

Despite renewed tension and unrest, emails from Walz staffers document his outreach to members of Black activist groups and the families of people killed by police in Minnesota. On April 20, the day a jury found Chauvin guilty of murdering Floyd, Walz staff logged phone conversations with the Floyd family, the Rev. Al Sharpton and former President Barack Obama. In one phone conversation on the anniversary of Floyd’s death — a day on which Walz called for 9 minutes and 29 seconds of silence acknowledging the length of time Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck — Walz reflected on his own “inherent racial bias.”

“I wanted to be thoughtful and be intentional around race and the murder of George Floyd. I am trying to learn this year,” he said, according to a staffer’s transcript of a call with the leader of a local foundation. “If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a lot of villages to raise a governor.”

With Walz, some advocates felt acknowledged in a way that was initially refreshing.

“The governor looked me in my eyes and said, ‘John, I need you to get me some legislation,’” said Johnathon McClellan, president of the Minnesota Justice Coalition, a racial equity nonprofit that advocates for social justice reform. “He understood the protests. He understood what the people were asking for.”

Walz received a flood of advice and opinions on what the next legislative steps should be, some from less-expected entities. The Minnesota Business Partnership, a group representing the CEOs of companies like 3M and Cargill as well as other business leaders, urged Walz to advocate for training policy changes and measures to make it harder to hire police officers who’d engaged in misconduct, while stressing that the group was broadly pro-law enforcement.

“Minnesota’s reputation matters,” said Charlie Weaver, the partnership’s executive director at the time. “If we had a reputation as a hostile environment for minority workers, that’s a big problem for our large companies.”

The Walz administration leapt at the chance to arrange a meeting between lawmakers and Weaver, a former chief of staff for Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty. “We need their help pushing key issues in the Senate,” wrote one policy adviser.

But the leadership of the Republican-controlled Senate criticized broader reform efforts as “anti-police.” Behind the scenes, according to an internal memo, the Senate agreed to just three of the dozens of proposals the Democrat-controlled House had advanced and Walz had supported.

“I wasn’t going to take things that I knew would hinder a good police officer from doing their job, and also hinder us from getting quality police in the future,” said then-Senate majority leader Paul Gazelka in an interview.

In response, Walz brokered a meeting between Gazelka and Families Supporting Families Against Police Violence. The group’s founder, Toshira Garraway, lost her fiance in 2009 after he was chased by the St. Paul police and later found dead in a bin at a recycling facility. She wanted to advocate for a bill eliminating the statute of limitations on wrongful death suits against police. (Garraway did not respond to requests for comment.) Gazelka said that the request for the meeting, coming straight from Walz, was unusual.

“I certainly was willing to do that, and did listen to them,” Gazelka said.

That meeting took place on June 3, 2021, the same day that a U.S. Marshals Service task force shot and killed Winston Smith Jr. in a parking garage in Minneapolis while trying to arrest him on an outstanding warrant. Walz’s office once again put the National Guard on notice and made repeated requests to the Biden administration to address its role in the incident and ease pressure on local authorities.

“DOJ in DC is a hard ‘no’ on doing a press conference,” staffers wrote in the days after Smith’s death. A spokesperson for the Department of Justice declined to comment.

Walz couldn’t avoid blowback, even from prominent local activists with whom he shared a cordial relationship. A letter sent by Nekima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights attorney and the founder of the Racial Justice Network who was in contact with the administration throughout the spring, demanded that Walz create an independent entity to investigate Smith’s death, criticizing the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension as hopelessly biased. Staff from both Walz’s office and the Minnesota Department of Public Safety wrote a draft of a response that said the BCA, which investigates incidents where police kill people, had the administration’s “utmost trust and confidence.” Although Levy Armstrong could not confirm that she got the reply, the BCA retained control of the case.

Protests over Smith’s death continued until a drunk driver plowed into a group of demonstrators, killing one woman and injuring others. The next day, on June 14, the Minnesota Legislature entered a special session with no movement on police reform and the threat of a government shutdown looming over negotiations. Roughly 38,000 potential layoff notices had already been sent to state employees, and Walz and Senate and House lawmakers had two and a half weeks to come to an agreement. Republicans were particularly eager to pass a bill that would end Walz’s COVID-19-era emergency powers.

“It was very nerve-wracking,” said House Speaker Melissa Hortman, a Democrat. “There were two pressures coming for a shutdown: the Republicans were interested in shutting down the government if the governor didn’t give up his emergency powers. My caucus was interested in shutting down the government if we didn’t have some public safety reforms.”

After the first day of the special session, Walz staffers noted that Senate Republicans had “retracted policy concessions” and seemed “withdrawn from negotiations.” Around the same time, Walz policy advisers were also doing damage control after sending an email that erroneously announced that the Minnesota Justice Coalition and Families Supporting Families Against Police Violence had pared down their list of desired legislation from nine bills to four, prompting an angry press release from the groups: “WE WANT TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT WE MADE NO SUCH AGREEMENT.” Kristin Beckmann, then Walz’s deputy chief of staff, admonished the policy advisers for speaking out of turn.

“This is a major set back in that trust. It’s really frustrating,” she wrote. Beckmann did not respond to requests for comment.

The emails end in mid-June with Walz’s schedulers batting away invitations and meetings to allow for all-day negotiation sessions while staffers tried to craft messaging for increasingly anxious state employees. “We’re getting a lot of internal pushback that we haven’t been able to provide enough information,” one state communications worker wrote.

Reform advocates had been urging Walz for weeks to take a hard-line stance during the final budget negotiations, even allowing the government to shut down to force more sweeping changes. But the governor made it clear that was a line he would not cross, according to staff notes on the conversations.

Walz said that he “had concerns over shutting down the government and that this hurts many of the people the administration is trying to help. He said he was hopeful on a few items passing this year,” according to the summation of a phone call with McClellan, the president of the Minnesota Justice Coalition. “He made it clear it was unlikely that everything he’s pushing for will pass.”

The notes proved prophetic. Three days before the deadline, Walz, Gazelka and Hortman announced a deal. The final bill included new restrictions on no-knock warrants, a law requiring 911 operators to alert mental health crisis teams under certain circumstances, and the creation of a kind of warrant that doesn’t require police to take suspects into custody. The package also included salary increases for state law enforcement, money for body cameras and enhanced penalties for the attempted murder of officers.

Through an executive action, Walz also directed state law enforcement agencies to turn over body camera footage from deadly police encounters to the affected families within five days.

Garraway’s bill to eliminate the statute of limitations on wrongful death suits against the police hit the cutting room floor, as did bills that would disallow police from making a number of equipment-related traffic stops, like ones for expired registration tags, and a bill that would form a civilian oversight board. In an interview with The Washington Post, Walz said he felt he’d “failed” Garraway.

At the end of one of Walz’s last press conferences that session, Jaylani Hussein, the executive director of the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and one of the people the Walz administration had kept in close contact with that spring, pushed through reporters to ask Walz to veto the compromise bill, saying it actually provided more cover for police. Walz, looking tired, listened, addressed Hussein by his first name and said he would not veto the bill.

“This is the challenge of democracy,” Walz said. “There are going to be a lot of people in this moment [who] see this as not acceptable. I understand that.”

Minnesota Republicans endorse Trump for president

The four Republican members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation endorsed former president Donald Trump for president Wednesday.

U.S. Reps. Brad Finstad, Michelle Fischbach, Pete Stauber and Tom Emmer — the House Majority Whip — released a joint statement on social media calling for fellow Republicans to rally behind Trump.

Trump faces a slew of criminal charges related to the capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, possession of classified documents and hush-money payments during the 2016 election cycle.

Nevertheless, he is far more popular than other Republican candidates, leading the next-most popular Republican, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, by an average of 50 points, according to FiveThirtyEight.

Fischbach is a longtime Trump supporter who voted against certifying the results of the 2020 election, part of a larger scheme by Trump and his allies to invalidate Joe Biden’s victory.

Emmer’s endorsement comes just months after Trump killed Emmer’s bid for House Speaker by calling him a “globalist RINO.” Emmer drew Trump’s displeasure when he voted to certify the 2020 election.

Minnesota Democrats have largely fallen in line behind the reelection campaign for Biden.

U.S. Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith have both publicly expressed support for Biden’s reelection campaign, as have Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar and Angie Craig.

In a statement to the Reformer, a spokesperson for U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum said McCollum also “strongly supports Biden in 2024.”

The only exception among the Democratic congressional delegation is U.S. Rep. Dean Phillips, who represents the western suburbs of the Twin Cities and is running against Biden in the Democratic primary.

Minnesota Reformer is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Minnesota Reformer maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Patrick Coolican for questions: info@minnesotareformer.com. Follow Minnesota Reformer on Facebook and Twitter.