How ICE Failed to Justify the Shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis in Minneapolis

NYT Homepage

by Mitch Smith and Hamed Aleaziz

February 14, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

The shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis by an ICE agent in Minneapolis on January 14 sparked widespread protests and a rapidly evolving narrative from the Trump administration. Initially, the Department of Homeland Security claimed that three individuals, including Sosa-Celis, attacked an agent with broomsticks and a snow shovel, leading the agent to fire defensively. However, this account quickly unraveled as new evidence emerged. Within days, federal officials revised their story, admitting that only two men had been involved in the incident, not three. Court records revealed discrepancies between the initial claims and the emerging facts. By January 20, the U.S. attorney for Minnesota requested that charges against Sosa-Celis and another man be dropped due to inconsistent evidence. Meanwhile, ICE's acting director, Todd Lyons, announced that two agents had been placed on leave after their accounts contradicted video footage of the incident. The collapse of the government’s narrative came during a period of heightened immigration enforcement in Minnesota under Operation边境Sí, which saw a surge of federal agents deployed to the state. This incident adds to a growing list of cases where official accounts of shootings and encounters have been later proven questionable or false. For critics of the Trump administration's immigration policies, this undermines trust in government statements about such incidents. The case highlights broader concerns about transparency and accountability within ICE and other law enforcement agencies. As public skepticism toward immigration enforcement grows, such incidents raise questions about how thoroughly authorities investigate their own actions and whether they prioritize truth over narrative when communicating with the public.

Verticals

newsgeneral

Originally published on NYT Homepage on 2/14/2026