To the Editor,
This letter is written in response to Rep. Terry Stier’s article on federal immigration enforcement published in the Feb. 5, 2026, edition of The New Prague Times (and Montgomery Messenger). Rep. Stier outlines his law enforcement background and his preference for behind-the-scenes engagement with federal agencies rather than public confrontation, a perspective shaped by his years as a police chief and legislator.
However, many Minnesotans are responding to more than tone or media coverage. Rural school administrators, farm operators, church leaders, and labor advocates in southern Minnesota have described families pulling back from public life, workers avoiding job sites, and parents hesitating to attend school events when immigration enforcement becomes highly visible. National organizations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police have warned that this kind of fear can reduce crime reporting and weaken public safety for everyone.
Rep. Stier argues that greater coordination with federal authorities can reduce disruption. Coordination may matter, but research cited by the Police Executive Research Forum shows that when local law enforcement is perceived as closely tied to immigration enforcement, trust declines and cooperation suffers. Many Minnesota sheriffs and police chiefs, including those in rural counties, have publicly emphasized that community trust is essential to solving crimes and keeping small towns safe.
The distinction Rep. Stier draws between Homeland Security Investigations and Enforcement and Removal Operations is important. Investigating fraud, trafficking, and serious criminal activity is widely supported by state officials, business groups, and labor organizations. What concerns many residents is the continued use of broad, highly visible enforcement actions that appear disconnected from those priorities. According to U.S. Department of Justice community policing guidance, effective enforcement should be narrow, targeted, and measured by improved safety rather than arrest totals.
The column also links current tensions to Minnesota’s recent fraud scandals. State and federal audits have made clear that those failures resulted from policy decisions, oversight gaps, and contractor misconduct. Conflating fraud with immigration enforcement risks placing blame on immigrant workers who had no role in those breakdowns and who contribute to local economies, farms, and small businesses.
Most Minnesotans are not asking for grandstanding. They are asking for humane enforcement, clear limits, and leadership that protects community stability alongside public safety. A truly middle-of-the-road approach should reduce fear, respect local realities, and acknowledge harms already occurring. That balance is where lasting solutions begin.
Respectfully,
— Sharon Anderson, New Prague, Minn.