A staunchly pro-Trump newspaper stunned readers by directly urging President Trump to dial back his aggressive immigration raids in Minneapolis—and to bench loyal ally Kristi Noem from TV—after a fatal Border Patrol shooting ignited fury.
Story Snapshot
- New York Post editorial breaks ranks, calls on Trump to de-escalate tensions following Alex Pretti’s death by federal agent.
- South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem singled out for fueling backlash through television defenses of enforcement.
- Even conservative outlets like Wall Street Journal join chorus criticizing tactics as backfiring on Republicans.
- Minneapolis sanctuary city clashes highlight federal-local blame game amid ongoing protests.
- Rare media fracture tests Trump’s immigration mandate and GOP unity.
Alex Pretti Shooting Sparks Crisis
A Border Patrol agent shot and killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday, triggering immediate protests and national scrutiny. This incident unfolded during President Trump’s intensified 2025-2026 immigration crackdown targeting sanctuary cities. Federal agents conducted raids in the progressive hub, long resistant to ICE operations. Local officials quickly blamed Washington for overreach, while feds pointed to city policies shielding undocumented individuals. Protests erupted as details emerged of the confrontation turning deadly.
New York Post Breaks from Trump Loyalty
New York Post editors addressed Trump head-on in their January 26 editorial, demanding de-escalation to prevent further unrest. They specifically urged pulling Kristi Noem off television, where the South Dakota governor defended raids as necessary. Noem, a key Trump surrogate, amplified federal arguments but drew fire for inflaming local tensions. This marked a sharp departure for the tabloid, known for unwavering pro-Trump stance. Common sense dictates that even allies must prioritize de-escalation when optics threaten broader goals like secure borders.
Conservative Media Joins Criticism
Wall Street Journal’s board echoed the call, labeling enforcement efforts as backfiring and alienating voters. They advocated pausing ICE actions in volatile areas like Minneapolis. Washington Post and New York Times piled on, pushing Congress to restrict funding. Fox News diverged, framing protests as socialist-orchestrated. This unusual alignment across outlets underscored risks of aggressive tactics in urban settings. Facts show enforcement succeeding elsewhere demands tactical pauses here to protect Republican gains.
Minneapolis leaders defended sanctuary status, accusing feds of recklessness. Trump administration stood firm, with no immediate response to editorials. Protests continued into Monday, amplifying the blame game between city hall and ICE.
Stakeholders Navigate Power Tensions
President Trump directs ICE and Border Patrol, wielding executive authority for mass deportations. Yet editorial boards wield public opinion sway, pressuring adjustments. Kristi Noem’s media role conflicts with calls to sideline her. Local officials resist, prioritizing community protection. Immigrant communities and Pretti’s family bear direct impacts, fearing raids. GOP faces voter backlash if violence persists, as Americans reject street shootings regardless of context.
NY Post Calls on Trump to 'De-Escalate' in Minneapolis — and Pull Kristi Noem Off of TV — in Stunning Editorial https://t.co/uRT5W9tgxQ
— Mediaite (@Mediaite) January 26, 2026
Power dynamics reveal media’s check on executive overreach. Trump decides operations, but influencers like Post editors shape narrative. Congress holds purse strings, per left-leaning calls, though conservatives favor targeted fixes over blanket halts.
Implications for Immigration Agenda
Short-term, protests may surge, forcing tactical shifts. Long-term, sustained violence could erode Trump’s base and 2026 plans. Minneapolis residents live in raid fear, disrupting local economies reliant on immigrant labor. Political divisions deepen, with Fox outlier against unified editorials. This sets precedent for pausing operations in hot spots, aligning enforcement with public tolerance.
