ICE Agent Gregory Morgan Testifies in Minneapolis Gun Incident, Federal Jurisdiction at Issue

An ICE officer charged with second-degree assault broke down on the stand during an eight-hour hearing in Minneapolis. A federal judge is weighing whether his case belongs in state or federal court.

ICE Agent Tearfully Defends Highway Gun Incident as Minneapolis Judge Weighs Jurisdiction

A federal immigration officer broke down in tears on the witness stand Tuesday as a Minneapolis court weighed whether his second-degree assault case should be tried in state or federal court. Courthouse News Service reports that the hearing, which ran roughly eight hours, centered on a roadway confrontation during Operation Metro Surge — a federal immigration enforcement campaign in the Twin Cities.

Gregory Morgan Jr., a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, is believed to be among the first federal officers to face criminal prosecution by state authorities for actions taken in the line of duty. U.S. District Judge Nancy Brasel, a Donald Trump appointee, presided over the evidentiary hearing and must now determine whether Morgan acted within the scope of his federal duties — a finding that would shift jurisdiction from state to federal court.

A Reluctant Deployment

Morgan testified that he was abruptly called up from Washington, D.C., to participate in the Twin Cities surge and did not want to go. He said he was unfamiliar with the area and had received reports of hostility directed at immigration officers.

"I'm not used to that, I've never seen something like that in policing," he told the court.

His voice breaking, Morgan described Operation Metro Surge as a "riot" environment in which he encountered relentless harassment, racial slurs, and death threats. He said the deployment affected him and his family deeply.

"I've never experienced something like this before," he said. "I had to take my daughter out of school… because I did the job I'm supposed to do."

The February 5 Incident

The assault charges stem from an incident on February 5, during the surge. State prosecutors allege Morgan drove an unmarked SUV along a freeway shoulder in Minneapolis before pointing a firearm at occupants of a white Cadillac that repeatedly swerved to block his path. Prosecutors contend the Cadillac's occupants had no way of knowing Morgan was a federal agent, and that his actions were unrelated to immigration enforcement.

Morgan disputed the characterization. He said he was unaware he had driven onto the shoulder, citing his unfamiliarity with the local roadway layout, and described the maneuver as a necessary, split-second response to a perceived threat during a "tactical withdrawal" back to base. He denied aiming the firearm directly at the driver, maintaining that he held it downward while shouting, "Police, back off."

Minnesota prosecutors pushed back, arguing that given the height difference between an SUV and a standard sedan, a weapon pointed downward could still appear to the Cadillac's driver as aimed directly at them.

State attorneys also pressed Morgan on alternative courses of action — slowing down, for instance, or driving more cautiously — suggesting his driving behavior may itself have prompted the Cadillac to intervene.

"I didn't know what that vehicle was, I didn't know who that person was," Morgan replied. "A lot of things are happening so fast, and you're in law enforcement, you have to look out for your safety."

Morgan testified that he had just come from a residential scene where agents had been "boxed-in" by protesters, and believed he was being followed. He said he was on high alert for an ambush when the Cadillac swerved toward him.

Witnesses Invoke Fifth Amendment

The Cadillac's occupants had been scheduled to testify at last week's session of the hearing, but Judge Brasel dismissed them after their attorney indicated they intended to invoke their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Brasel said she may later assess whether their testimony remains necessary.

ICE Training Officer's Shifting Testimony

ICE training officer John Parodi, who trained Morgan, took the stand and testified that displaying or pointing a firearm does not constitute a "use of force" under agency definitions, and that standard restrictions applied to other law enforcement — such as prohibitions on pointing weapons at motorists — do not apply to ICE agents.

"There is no tit-for-tat matching force; there is no policy that limits or forces the agent to react to a specific defined force or specific defined response," Parodi said. "Our officers have the ability to judge and deploy a reasonable level of force."

Under cross-examination, Minnesota introduced department policy stating that officers may use force only when no safe alternative exists. Prosecutors pressed Parodi extensively on what constitutes force, whether a firearm qualifies as a lethal weapon, and how agents are trained to respond.

Parodi — who noted he is subject to a Touhy demand, a legal mechanism limiting what federal employees may disclose in court — repeatedly said he could not comment on specific agency protocols or training details beyond general concepts. His inconsistent answers drew pointed criticism from Brasel.

"This witness is all over the place in terms of what he answers and what he doesn't," the judge said. "I can't discern any line. I'm really close to just disregarding his entire testimony."

Morgan's law enforcement partner, Myles Codner, had testified at last week's session in support of Morgan's account of events.

Broader Implications

The case is expected to serve as a significant legal test of how courts allocate jurisdiction when state prosecutors charge federal agents for conduct tied to official duties. Minnesota's felony charges against Morgan — and a separate case involving another ICE agent — are believed to represent the first instances in which on-duty federal immigration officers have faced state criminal charges of this kind.

Source: Courthouse News Service