>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
In meetings with local officials, including sheriffs and corrections leaders, federal authorities secured cooperation that had previously been inconsistent or unavailable. According to Homan, every county jail he engaged with agreed to work with federal immigration authorities. That shift could fundamentally change how enforcement operates going forward.
Instead of relying on resource-heavy street arrests, which often require surveillance and multiple officers, agents can now coordinate directly with local jails. That means individuals can be transferred into federal custody at the point of release, reducing risk and dramatically improving efficiency.
The implications are significant.
Previously, tracking down a single individual could involve an entire team of agents and no guarantee of success. Under the new model, one officer can complete the same task inside a controlled environment. That shift frees up manpower, allowing agents to focus on additional cases rather than chasing leads across communities.
Homan described the change as a structural victory rather than a temporary enforcement spike.
Meanwhile, questions about declining weekly deportation figures were addressed during an exchange with Rob Finnerty. Homan attributed the dip to a transition period as thousands of new agents are brought online.
The agency has undergone rapid expansion, growing its workforce significantly in a short period of time. As those new personnel are deployed, Homan suggested enforcement activity is expected to accelerate again.
Early-year figures appear to support that outlook.
Even before the full deployment of new agents, removals have already surpassed previous benchmarks from recent years. That trend, officials say, is likely to intensify as operational capacity increases.
But beyond the numbers, Homan emphasized a broader strategic shift.
The operation in Minnesota was not designed to sustain constant large-scale arrests. Instead, it aimed to disrupt what he described as the “sanctuary model” — a system that makes federal enforcement more difficult by limiting cooperation and forcing agents into high-risk public encounters.
By establishing jail-based coordination, federal authorities have effectively reduced the need for those confrontational scenarios. Street arrests, which often generate viral footage and political backlash, are replaced with routine transfers that occur out of public view.
That dynamic, Homan argues, removes a key advantage used by critics of enforcement policies, including figures like Amy Klobuchar, who have frequently highlighted such incidents.
The result is a quieter but more efficient system.
While political leaders like Tim Walz and others may view the recent developments as a win, Homan suggests the opposite may be true. The infrastructure now in place could outlast any single operation and reshape how enforcement is carried out across the state.
In short, what appeared to be an exit may instead mark the beginning of a new phase — one defined less by headlines and more by long-term structural change.
