Case: Minnesota Department of Human Rights vs. Minneapolis Police Department

In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder on May 25, 2020, the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) filed a charge of discrimination against the City of Minneapolis (City) and the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) on June 1, 2020. They alleged that the City and MPD were engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination, especially against people of color in Minneapolis under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363A.12, 2. They sought preliminary injunctive relief to stop the immediate and irreparable harm of possible discrimination, especially against people of color, along with ensuring an efficient and speedy investigation into the City/MPD’s practices. On June 8, 2020, Judge Karen Janisch of the Hennepin County District Court granted the injunction and held that MPD had to immediately ban chokeholds, implement a duty to report for any unauthorized use of force, implement a duty to intervene by other officers if they see a MPD officer used unauthorized force, require that crowd control weapons be authorized by the MPD Chief, require timely discipline decisions for officers, and require review of body-worn camera footage. Moreover, Judge Janisch required MPD/City to implement systemic change after MDHR’s investigation concluded.

 From June 2020 to April 2022, MDHR gained information about MPD’s practices, determining that there was probable cause that the City/MPD engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act. With City/MPD’s cooperation, DHR reviewed 700 hours of body-worn camera footage, 480,000 pages of documents (including training materials, disciplinary records, public messaging documents, and more), and observed MPD trainings. MDHR also analyzed traffic stops, prosecutions, searches, arrests, and citations, along with conducting interviews of MPD staff, community groups, and prosecutors. After collecting this data, MDHR found that MPD was acting discriminatorily and was racially biased. For example, although Black individuals only comprise 19% of Minneapolis’ population, 63% of all use of force incidents  between January 2010 and December 2020 were against Black individuals. MPD used neck restraints on Black individuals at double the rate compared to white individuals. MPD also disproportionately used chemical irritants on Black individuals and wrote them up for wrongful disorderly conduct allegations, which can be financially burdensome to recover from. Moreover, MPD officers often used covert social media accounts to surveil Black individuals and organizations, even if the organization had no relevance to any ongoing criminal investigation. MPD also had deficient training programs, which emphasized a paramilitary approach and unnecessary escalation. MPD officers were trained to be aggressive toward community members, especially Black community members. In 56.8% of cases, MPD officers failed to de-escalate a situation when it would have been otherwise appropriate to do so.

Many of these patterns stemmed from systems of ineffective accountability. For example, the Office of Police Conduct Review (OCPR) is a division within the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights for investigating police misconduct complaints, yet OCPR lacked independence from MPD as many of the staff on OCPR were sworn-in current or former MPD police officers. OCPR only investigated 50% of complaints, and in 40% of those cases, officers were cleared of any wrongdoing, showing inadequate discipline. Based on these patterns, MDHR found a probable cause of racial discrimination.

After MDHR’s report, MDHR and the City/MPD began working together to develop a court-enforceable settlement agreement to resolve the probable cause discrimination. They released a joint statement of principles on July 13, 2022, which was an agreement to work together to develop and implement a framework to ensure non-discriminatory policing. On March 1, 2023, the Minneapolis City Council and Mayor Jacob Frey approved the court-enforceable settlement agreement, which included revising the MPD manual to more explicitly prohibit discrimination and retaliation for reporting discrimination. The agreement also included terms limiting the use of force to situations where it is absolutely necessary. Moreover, the agreement created guidelines about the limited situations when MPD officers can conduct stops or searches without warrants. For example, MPD may not search someone simply because they smell like marijuana. The agreement also included terms for body-worn cameras, training on the use of force and how to handle mental health crises with care. The agreement also stipulated that for any complaint of misconduct, OCPR/the City must review the complaint within 30 days and decide if there is a possible policy violation and begin an investigation, which must be completed within 180 days. Lastly, the agreement implemented an Independent Evaluator who would write semi-annual reports and progress reviews.

On June 16, 2023, the Department of Justice reiterated that there was probable cause of discrimination by the City/MPD. The DOJ said that the City/MPD’s conduct deprived people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law. On February 2, 2024, the Independent Evaluator was selected, Effective Law Enforcement for All (ELEFA). On February 3, 2025, ELEFA released its first semi-annual report, which was mostly focused on reviewing MPD’s drafting efforts for new policies, especially policies for public feedback, use of force, engagement with minors, and mental health crisis interventions. In its second report on May 20, 2025,, ELEFA praised MPD for its updated policies and training procedures, especially in terms of the use of force, body-worn cameras, police misconduct, engaging with minors, and mental health crisis management. In its most recent report on January 15, 2026, ELEFA praised MPD for its new policies, training, and use of force curriculum. However, ELEFA noted MPD still struggles to write non-discriminatory policies quickly and that MPD is not addressing its backlog of police misconduct cases evenly. Lastly, many MPD officers lack the time for extra training, showing capacity issues. As of February 28, 2026, MPD continues to draft and implement non-discriminatory policies in light of the court-enforceable agreement.