Ah, yes. Nothing says “decisive leadership” quite like asking your constituents to transform into amateur documentarians while federal agents in tactical gear treat the local Target like a set for a Michael Bay reboot. Governor Tim Walz’s strategy for handling federal overreach in the Twin Cities isn’t just a “war of attrition”—it’s a masterclass in the “thoughts and prayers” school of legal recourse, only this time with more cloud storage and significantly higher chances of getting your phone smashed by a federal boot.

Let’s unpack the logic of the North Star State’s plan to defeat the federal government with a well-curated database and a dream.

### The Nuremberg Delusion
The article suggests Walz is “banking evidence” for a future akin to the Nuremberg trials. It’s a bold choice to compare administrative immigration enforcement to the literal Holocaust, but let’s look at the legal mechanics here. Walz is promising “future prosecution” for federal agents operating under executive mandates.

There’s a pesky little thing called the **Supremacy Clause** (Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution) which essentially says federal law is the “supreme Law of the Land.” Unless Minnesota plans on seceding to form the “People’s Republic of Tater Tot Hotdish,” the state’s ability to prosecute federal agents for carrying out federal orders is—to put it mildly—nonexistent. Promising a “Nuremberg trial” for ICE agents is like promising to sue the sun for a sunburn; it’s high-concept performance art, not a legal strategy.

### The “Citizen Paparazzi” Defense
The Governor’s big “call to action” is for citizens to film the “atrocities.” While filming police is a protected First Amendment right (*Glik v. Cunniffe*), suggesting that unarmed civilians should crowd around “masked and armed men in combat armor” at school bus stops is… a choice.

It’s a peculiar brand of “emotional solace” to tell someone, “I can’t stop the guys in the tactical vests from taking your neighbor, but if you could get a high-res landscape shot for my spreadsheet, that would be great.” It’s less of a defense plan and more of a crowd-sourced snuff film for a future court case that will likely be dismissed by a federal judge before the first exhibit is even loaded onto the projector.

### The War of Attrition (That Only One Side Is Fighting)
A “war of attrition” implies that both sides have resources to burn. In this corner, we have the Federal Government, which possesses an infinite printing press and the Department of Justice. In the other corner, we have the State of Minnesota, which possesses a database of videos and a Governor who believes the ballot box is a magic wand for retroactive justice.

The assumption here is that “peaceful regime change” will somehow invalidate the actions taken today. History check: that’s not how the legal system works. Qualified immunity exists precisely to protect government officials from being sued or prosecuted for doing their jobs, even if their jobs involve things the Governor of Minnesota finds “atrocious.” Unless Walz is planning to lobby for the total abolition of the **Qualified Immunity** doctrine—a feat no administration in decades has managed—his “database” is effectively a digital scrapbook of things he couldn’t stop.

### Solace via Spreadsheet
The article admits this rhetoric is “emotional solace” for his constituents. This is the most honest part of the piece. It’s political theater designed to make people feel like they are “doing something” while the state government acknowledges its own total irrelevance in the face of federal power.

Instead of deploying state resources to actually interfere with or legally block these maneuvers in real-time, Walz is asking for content. He’s not leading a resistance; he’s managing a YouTube channel. If the goal is “accountability,” one might wonder why the accountability doesn’t start with a state executive who admits he can only offer a “record for posterity” while his “besieged” hospitals and school bus stops are overrun.

### The Verdict
Minnesota’s strategy isn’t a war of attrition; it’s a surrender disguised as a documentary project. By focusing on the “future prosecution” and the “ballot box,” Walz is essentially telling Minnesotans: “We’ve already lost the present, but wait until you see the 2032 Netflix docuseries.”

SEO tip: If you’re looking for “how to stop federal agents,” a smartphone camera and a dream of a mid-century war crimes tribunal probably aren’t the top results for a reason. But hey, at least the database will be well-organized. Good luck with the “prosecutions,” Tim. I’m sure the feds are shaking in their combat boots at the thought of being featured in your next PowerPoint presentation.