Federal Lawsuit Explodes in Minnesota

Person holding a document titled LAWSUIT in office.

Minnesota is being dragged into federal court after state leaders allegedly told thousands of faith-based school families they can pay taxes like everyone else—but can’t access the same security protections when violence strikes.

Story Snapshot

Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit accusing Gov. Tim Walz’s administration of unlawfully excluding nonpublic schools from key Minnesota school-security programs.
The dispute centers on the state’s $50 million Building and Cyber Security Grant Program and the Safe Schools Program, which nonpublic schools say they cannot access.
Catholic leaders say they warned Walz in 2023—after the Nashville Covenant School shooting—that religious and private schools faced rising threats and needed equal security support.
Walz’s office counters that private schools receive some state funding and training support, and argues the administration is committed to school safety and gun-violence prevention.

Federal Lawsuit Targets Minnesota’s Public-Only Security Grants

Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog organization, sued Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, arguing that his administration’s approach to school security funding unlawfully leaves nonpublic schools out. The suit focuses on programs that direct security dollars to public school districts and charters while excluding private and faith-based schools. Judicial Watch claims that policy endangers roughly 72,000 nonpublic-school students across Minnesota.

Minnesota’s nonpublic schools include Catholic, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim institutions—campuses that often face targeted threats because of their religious identity. The lawsuit’s core claim is equal treatment: families choosing nonpublic education still live under the same public-safety realities, and the state should not draw a hard line that denies access to security upgrades and safety support. No court ruling has been reported yet, and the case remains active.

Warnings After Nashville and a Later Minneapolis Attack

The pressure campaign described in the reporting traces back to the aftermath of the March 2023 Nashville Covenant School shooting. On April 14, 2023, Minnesota Catholic Conference Executive Director Jason Adkins and MINNDEPENDENT President Tim Benz sent a letter to Walz urging $50 million in security funding for nonpublic schools. They cited Nashville, plus local concerns and threats involving Jewish and Muslim schools, as reasons Minnesota needed parity across all sectors.

The complaint also points to a later mass shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic school—reported as occurring roughly two years after the 2023 letter—where two people were killed and 17 were injured. The timeline detail is significant politically and legally because it frames the dispute as more than budget theory. It argues leaders had explicit notice of the risk to religious schools, then left those schools outside Minnesota’s main security-grant structure anyway.

How Minnesota’s Programs Are Structured—and Why That Matters

The state programs at issue grew out of post-Parkland national efforts to harden schools and expand safety planning. Minnesota’s Safe Schools Program has been described as levy-based, which can structurally sideline private schools that do not operate under the same local tax levy framework as public districts. The Building and Cyber Security Grant Program, meanwhile, is described as targeting public districts and charter schools and totaling $50 million.

Those program designs are not just technical details; they define who the state considers eligible for taxpayer-backed safety investments. Critics see a value choice embedded in the rules: when lawmakers restrict eligibility to public systems, they effectively treat private-school students as outside the public-interest duty of protection. Supporters of the public-only model argue the state must follow statutes and existing funding mechanisms, not rewrite them through administrative discretion.

Walz’s Response: “Some Aid Exists,” But Eligibility Dispute Persists

Walz’s office disputes the idea that nonpublic schools are being abandoned. According to the reporting, his administration says private schools receive some state funding and trainings and emphasizes a broader commitment to school safety and gun-violence prevention. The conflict is partly factual and partly definitional: nonpublic-school advocates say the key security grants and programs they requested remain off-limits, while the governor’s office points to other forms of support.

That gap is likely where litigation will turn: whether Minnesota’s structure creates an unconstitutional disparity, or whether it reflects a legally permissible distinction tied to how public education is funded and governed. Based on the available information, the record contains competing claims but limited publicly reported detail on the court’s early actions, filings, or specific legal tests the judge is likely to apply.

The SHIELD Bill and the Bigger Fight Over Equal Protection

As the lawsuit proceeds, Minnesota lawmakers are also considering a new package described as the SHIELD bill. The reporting says it would continue the pattern of excluding nonpublic schools from new security funding. That legislative posture matters because it suggests the issue is not an accidental oversight but an intentional policy choice—one that could be clarified or corrected by lawmakers without waiting for a judge to intervene.

Judicial Watch has also pointed to a broader pattern of legal battles involving Walz and the group’s equal-protection arguments in other contexts, but the Minnesota school-security dispute stands on its own facts: threatened campuses, prior requests, and eligibility rules that draw a public-private line. For families who prioritize faith-based education, the practical question remains simple—whether the state will help protect their children’s schools the same way it protects everyone else’s.