Trump administration stopped sharing evidence in Good and Pretti killings, Minnesota officials say

The federal government began sharing evidence with Minnesota in July, then stopped soon afterward. State investigators say important materials remain unavailable. They are investigating the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers in Minneapolis. The dispute matters because Minnesota says it cannot independently assess possible crimes without the underlying evidence.

Drew Evans said federal authorities still hold Good’s clothing, the phone of the officer who killed her and interview recordings. In Pretti’s case, Minnesota says it has not received a recorded officer statement, firearms, phones, projectiles, casings or a gun taken from Pretti before he was shot. Earlier transfers included police body-camera video and hard drives containing statements.

Mary Moriarty said the U.S. Attorney’s Office told her on Sept. 10 that sharing would pause indefinitely because of “challenges with D.C.” Minnesota has asked a judge to order production of the remaining materials. The Justice Department says it may decline to share information under its rules.

Touhy regulations are Justice Department rules governing how the department responds when outside authorities request federal records or information. In this dispute, the rules are central because federal lawyers use them to defend the decision not to keep sharing evidence with Minnesota prosecutors. The regulations do not automatically settle whether Minnesota can investigate the shootings.

Justice Department attorneys argued that the regulations apply when formal legal proceedings are underway. They said Minnesota’s requests came when no active court case existed. On that basis, the attorneys claimed the department had discretion to decline sharing information with state authorities. Minnesota disagrees and has asked a judge to require federal agencies to provide the evidence.

The disagreement remains before the court. Minnesota says federal officials have identified no legal authority or rational basis for obstructing state criminal investigations. The department maintains that its rules permit the federal government to withhold information in these circumstances. The article does not report a final judicial ruling on the issue.

The shootings killed two people, both 37 years old. Renee Good, a mother of three, was fatally shot on Jan. 7 while leaving a Minneapolis protest. Alex Pretti, an intensive care nurse, was killed weeks later in Minneapolis. The article does not give an exact date for Pretti’s death.

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot Good. Bystander video shows officers ordering her from an SUV after she repeatedly honked the horn. She began pulling forward, and an officer in front of the vehicle fired through the windshield, then fired twice more near the driver’s window, according to video analyses. Federal officials said the officer acted in self-defense.

A federal officer shot Pretti, but the article does not identify that officer by name or specify the officer’s agency. The cases triggered nationwide protests over the administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. No criminal charges have been filed in connection with either fatal shooting. Minnesota authorities continue seeking evidence from federal agencies.

Minnesota officials say the evidence is necessary to conduct an independent investigation rather than rely only on the federal government’s account. The state sued President Donald Trump’s administration in March to obtain materials related to both shootings. Officials have said they do not trust the federal government to investigate itself, especially while federal agencies control important records and physical evidence.

The missing materials could help investigators compare witness accounts, officer statements, video and physical evidence. Drew Evans said federal authorities still have Good’s clothing, the phone of the officer who shot her and recordings of interviews that Minnesota officials have never viewed. For Pretti’s case, the state says it lacks an officer’s recorded statement, firearms, phones, projectiles, casings and a gun taken from Pretti.

Minnesota prosecutors say federal agencies have offered no legal authority or rational basis for obstructing state criminal investigations. They have asked a judge to order the evidence turned over. The federal government began sharing some materials in July, but Minnesota says the transfer paused indefinitely in September.

The federal government’s position is that Minnesota prosecutors may not have legal authority to investigate federal officers acting in their official roles. The article does not provide a detailed explanation of that jurisdictional argument. It reports that the Trump administration has suggested state prosecutors lack jurisdiction, while Minnesota officials reject relying on federal authorities alone.

That disagreement affects who controls the investigation. Federal agencies possess much of the disputed evidence, including officer phones, recorded interviews, firearms and other physical materials. Minnesota prosecutors say they need those items to conduct their own criminal inquiry. Federal lawyers separately argue that Justice Department rules give them discretion to decline information requests when no formal legal proceeding is underway.

The jurisdiction question has not been resolved in the article. Minnesota has again asked a judge to order federal agencies to provide evidence. The state says federal authorities have identified no valid legal basis for obstructing its investigations. No criminal charges have been filed in either shooting, so the legal dispute remains active while evidence access is contested.

Unavailable evidence can leave investigators unable to test competing accounts, verify witness statements or fully examine how officers used force. In these cases, Minnesota says federal authorities still hold recordings, phones, weapons, clothing and other materials. That means state prosecutors may have an incomplete record when deciding whether the shootings support criminal charges.

For example, Minnesota has not viewed a recorded statement from the officer who shot Pretti. It also says federal authorities retain the firearms used by officers, projectiles, casings and a gun taken from Pretti. In Good’s case, investigators still seek the shooting officer’s phone, her clothing and interview recordings. Those materials could be important to reconstructing events, although the article does not state what they contain.

No criminal charges have been filed in either case. The state is asking a judge to order federal agencies to hand over the evidence, while the Justice Department argues it can decline sharing under its rules. The article does not report whether the court will compel production or how the investigations will ultimately end.

Federalism divides government power between the national government and the states. Federal agencies enforce federal laws, while state and local prosecutors generally investigate and prosecute violations of state law within their jurisdictions. When conduct may violate both systems, authority can overlap, and courts may need to decide which investigation can proceed and what evidence must be shared.

That tension appears in Minnesota’s dispute with the Trump administration. The shootings involved federal officers, but Minnesota officials are pursuing state criminal investigations. The administration has suggested state prosecutors lack jurisdiction over federal officers. Minnesota says it needs federal evidence to investigate independently and does not trust the federal government to investigate itself.

The article does not explain the full legal rules governing federal-officer jurisdiction or state prosecutions. It reports that Justice Department lawyers cite Touhy regulations and say they may decline information requests when no formal proceeding exists. Minnesota has asked a judge to order evidence production. No charges have been filed, and no ruling resolving the authority dispute is reported.