Judges Question Pam Bondi’s Social Media Posts On Minnesota Arrests

Two federal judges have raised concerns about Attorney General Pam Bondi’s use of social media to publicize a wave of arrests last month of people charged with interfering with federal officers during an immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota.

In an order earlier this week, Magistrate Judge Dulce Foster said Bondi’s posts on X including the names and, in many instances, photographs of the defendants shortly after their arrests “violated a court order” placing those cases under seal.

Foster leveled the criticism in connection with the prosecution of Nitzana Flores, a South Haven, Minnesota, resident accused of assaulting two Border Patrol officers during a scuffle last month in Minneapolis surrounding the arrest of another person for allegedly ramming a government vehicle.

The judge said Bondi’s posting of the names and arrest photos undercut prosecutors’ request for an order to prohibit defense attorneys from publicly disclosing personal information about immigration agents involved in the case against Flores. The requested order would also prohibit any defense counsel from sharing that information with their client.

Foster said Bondi’s social media posts made the government’s request for court-ordered discretion for its agents “eyebrow-raising, to say the least.”

“The government failed to respect Ms. Flores’s dignity and privacy, exposed her to a risk of doxxing, and generally thumbed its nose at the notion that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. The post also directly violated a court order sealing the case,” the judge wrote. “Notwithstanding, the government now seeks an accommodation from the Court that it blatantly failed to give Ms. Flores and her codefendants.”

Foster modified the government’s proposal by broadening it to cover any party, victim or witness, while narrowing it to details such as phone numbers, residential addresses, email addresses and dates of birth. The judge also declined to restrict what evidence Flores can see and declined to prohibit disclosure of identities, which would include names and photographs.

At a hearing in a separate Minneapolis case last week, another magistrate judge, Shannon Elkins, directed prosecutors to “address whether the public posting of photographs violated the Court’s sealing order.” The government missed a deadline Tuesday to respond. Elkins later agreed to extend the deadline until Monday.

Justice Department spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment, but there are signs that Bondi got the magistrates’ messages.

On Friday, Bondi was careful not to jump the gun when announcing a new, massive wave of arrests in connection with a disruptive immigration-related protest at a St. Paul church last month. The new indictment Bondi announced added 30 defendants to the nine people already charged, who include former CNN anchor Don Lemon.

“YOU CANNOT ATTACK A HOUSE OF WORSHIP,” Bondi wrote in an X post that went up within a minute of the indictment being unsealed in the court’s online docket. “If you do so, you cannot hide from us — we will find you, arrest you, and prosecute you. This Department of Justice STANDS for Christians and all Americans of faith.”

While booking photos or mugshots are public in many states, the federal government has traditionally cited privacy concerns to resist making them public in federal criminal cases. In 2012, the Obama administration instituted a nationwide Justice Department policy to refuse release of such photos, except where necessary to track down a fugitive or for investigative reasons.

That policy appears to have been abandoned after President Donald Trump returned to office last year. The Justice Department has for decades routinely publicized the names, ages and hometowns of people arrested by including that information in press releases.