Why are you running for Hennepin County attorney?

I am running because Hennepin County needs a county attorney who can deliver both safety and justice — and who has the independence and legal experience to actually do it.

This community has been through a terrible stretch: violence in our neighborhoods, deep distrust in the justice system, and this winter’s Metro Surge, when federal agents came into our streets and left people harmed, afraid, and still waiting for real accountability. I believe accountability for what happened during Metro Surge is one of the defining legal and moral tests facing the next county attorney.

But accountability is not a slogan. These will be hard cases. They will require judgment, courage, and serious legal skill. I have spent nearly 30 years organizing, litigating, and taking on powerful interests. I have represented people harmed by the powerful, gone to the Minnesota Supreme Court to change the law, and built a career around hard fights where the stakes are real. I am the only reform candidate in this race with the legal experience to manage complicated, high-pressure cases and make accountability more than a promise.

I am also running from outside the political establishment. The established interests that broke trust in this system are not going to be the ones to fix it. Hennepin County needs independent leadership — someone who is not beholden to the same insiders, factions, and failed assumptions that have left too many people feeling unsafe and unheard.

I reject the idea that we have to choose between reform and public safety. We need an office that takes violent crime seriously, protects constitutional rights, treats victims with dignity, works with law enforcement without being captured by it, and applies the law equally no matter who is accused of breaking it.

That is why I am running: to build an office worthy of this moment, rooted in safety, justice, independence, and real accountability.

What are your priorities for the county attorney's office?

First, the county attorney’s office must take violent crime seriously. People deserve to feel safe in their homes, neighborhoods, schools, transit stops, and public spaces. That means focusing resources on the cases that cause the most harm, holding violent and repeat offenders accountable, and working with law enforcement, community organizations, public health leaders, schools, and service providers to prevent violence before it happens.

Second, we need real accountability for Metro Surge and for abuses of power wherever they occur. The law must apply equally whether someone is on a street corner, in a boardroom, or wearing a badge. The next county attorney will have to make difficult, legally complex decisions about federal agents and others who harmed our community. That work must be careful, independent, transparent, and strong enough to withstand pressure.

Third, the office must rebuild trust by being fair, transparent, and consistent. Communities need to understand how charging decisions are made. Victims need to be treated with dignity. Defendants must have their rights protected. And the public needs confidence that politics, favoritism, fear, or insider relationships are not driving decisions.

Fourth, I will focus on protecting people from economic harm, including fraud, wage theft, scams targeting seniors, consumer abuse, and exploitation by powerful interests. Public safety is not only about violent crime. It is also about whether people can live their lives without being cheated, threatened, or abused.

Finally, I will make the office itself a stronger, more inclusive, and more effective workplace. The county attorney’s office is a large public institution, and it cannot succeed without the people who do the work every day. That means listening to staff, respecting public workers, recruiting and retaining diverse talent, and building a culture where people are supported, accountable, and focused on the mission.

What do you plan to do differently from your predecessor?

I will lead in a way that rebuilds the coalition for reform instead of shattering it.

My predecessor raised important issues about racial disparities, youth justice, and the need to think differently about prosecution. Those conversations matter. But reform does not happen by announcement, by faction, or by making enemies out of people who should be allies. It requires a coalition: public defenders, prosecutors, victims, law enforcement, public workers, community organizations, reform advocates, neighborhood leaders, and people directly impacted by the system.

The biggest problem with the current office is not simply one policy or one case. It is that the office lost the trust of too many people it needs in order to succeed. It alienated staff. It strained relationships with law enforcement. It left victims and neighborhoods feeling unheard. And it too often treated disagreement as betrayal rather than as part of the hard work of governing.

I will do that differently.

I believe reform has to be built, not declared. As county attorney, I will bring people to the table before major decisions are made. I will be clear about standards, transparent about priorities, and willing to listen to people who do not already agree with me. I will take violent crime seriously while also protecting constitutional rights, reducing disparities, and pursuing alternatives that actually make communities safer.

The choice is not between going backward and pretending the current approach is working. Hennepin County needs a county attorney who can rebuild trust, restore focus, and make reform durable enough to survive beyond one administration.

What racial and socio-economic disparities in the criminal justice system have you identified, and how will you address them as county attorney?

Racial and economic disparities show up at nearly every stage of the criminal justice system: who is policed, who is charged, who sits in jail before trial, who has access to treatment or diversion, whose harm is taken seriously, and who has the resources to recover after contact with the system.

As county attorney, I would start from a basic principle: the law must be applied fairly, consistently, and without regard to race, income, neighborhood, or political power. That means taking disparities seriously without pretending that public safety concerns are not real. The communities most harmed by over-policing are often the same communities most harmed by violence, under-protection, and lack of accountability.

I would address these disparities in several ways.

First, I would demand clear, transparent standards for charging and plea decisions so that similarly situated people are treated similarly. Discretion is unavoidable in prosecution, but it should not be invisible or arbitrary.

Second, I would expand and strengthen alternatives to incarceration where they actually promote safety: treatment, restorative approaches, youth interventions, mental health responses, and diversion for lower-level offenses. Poverty, addiction, trauma, and housing instability should not be made worse by unnecessary criminal justice involvement.

Third, I would take seriously the economic drivers of injustice. People should not sit in jail simply because they are poor. Victims should not be ignored because they live in a neighborhood with less political power. And the office should pursue wage theft, fraud, scams targeting seniors, and other forms of exploitation that harm working people and low-income communities.

Fourth, I would rebuild the coalition necessary for durable reform. Reducing disparities requires prosecutors, public defenders, judges, law enforcement, community groups, victims’ advocates, public workers, and directly impacted people to work from a shared commitment to both safety and justice.

The goal is not a system that is simply less punitive. The goal is a system that is more fair, more focused, more effective, and more trusted by the people it serves.

How can the office change practices in civil court matters to improve services to the public and address disparities?

Civil court work is often less visible than criminal prosecution, but it can have enormous consequences for families, workers, taxpayers, and vulnerable residents. The office should approach civil matters with the same commitments to fairness, transparency, and public service.

That means using plain language, improving communication with people who are not lawyers, expanding language access, and making sure people understand what is happening in cases that affect their lives. It also means using discretion wisely in areas like child protection, civil commitments, collections, and county litigation so that poverty, disability, housing instability, or lack of legal representation do not become barriers to justice.

The office should look for ways to resolve civil matters earlier, avoid unnecessary escalation, and reduce practices that punish people simply because they are poor. At the same time, it should be aggressive when civil enforcement can protect the public — against fraud, exploitation, wage theft, scams targeting seniors, and abuses by powerful interests.

Civil practice should reflect the same principle as the rest of the office: government power must be used carefully, fairly, and in service of the public.