Military Lawyers Prosecuting Civilians in Minnesota Faces Legal Challenge

A federal case against a Minneapolis resident has raised questions about the legality of using military lawyers to prosecute civilians.

Apr. 5, 2026 at 7:24pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The federal government has deployed military lawyers to temporarily serve as assistant prosecutors in Minnesota's U.S. Attorney's office, which has faced a wave of resignations. This method now faces a legal test over whether these military lawyers can prosecute civilians in court cases that have no ties to the U.S. military. The challenge has been raised in a federal case against a Minneapolis resident, with the defendant's attorney arguing that using military lawyers to prosecute civilians runs afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Why it matters

The use of military lawyers to prosecute civilians in federal courts raises concerns about the blurring of the separation between the military and civilian law enforcement, which the Posse Comitatus Act is meant to protect. If a judge rules in favor of the defendant, it could have significant implications for the U.S. Attorney's office in Minnesota, which has already seen a mass exodus of lawyers.

The details

The federal government has deployed 25 military lawyers, known as Judge Advocate Generals (JAGs), to serve as special assistant U.S. Attorneys in Minnesota's U.S. Attorney's office. This strategy has also been seen in Tennessee and Washington, D.C. In the case against Minneapolis resident Paul Johnson, his attorney, Kevin Riach, has argued that using military lawyers to prosecute civilians is unlawful under the Posse Comitatus Act. Riach is seeking the removal of the military lawyer assigned to prosecute Johnson, Michael Hakes-Rodriguez. The government has argued that the military lawyers are operating strictly under the Justice Department and are not influenced by the Defense Department.

  • In January, Paul Johnson was arrested and charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding law enforcement.
  • On Friday, a judge heard arguments on Riach's legal challenge in a Minneapolis federal courtroom.

The players

Paul Johnson

A north Minneapolis resident who is charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding law enforcement.

Kevin Riach

The attorney representing Paul Johnson, who has argued that using military lawyers to prosecute civilians runs afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Michael Hakes-Rodriguez

A military lawyer assigned to prosecute Paul Johnson's case.

Bradley Endicott

An Assistant U.S. Attorney arguing on behalf of Hakes-Rodriguez, claiming the military attorney's appointment is allowed under exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act.

Shannon Elkins

A U.S. Magistrate Judge who questioned Hakes-Rodriguez directly over his independence while serving as a special assistant U.S. Attorney.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“There is no plausible reason a U.S. Army Judge Advocate [JAG] should be prosecuting Mr. Johnson in a Minnesota court.”

— Kevin Riach, Attorney representing Paul Johnson

“To civilians, it may appear the government is deploying the military to prosecute the cases that career Department of Justice attorneys would or could not.”

— Eleven former military lawyers

“There is not a single prosecution from my office that is being influenced by the Defense Department.”

— Bradley Endicott, Assistant U.S. Attorney

What’s next

A judge is expected to rule on whether the military lawyer can continue to prosecute the case against Paul Johnson.

The takeaway

The use of military lawyers to prosecute civilians in federal courts raises concerns about the blurring of the separation between the military and civilian law enforcement, which the Posse Comitatus Act is meant to protect. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the U.S. Attorney's office in Minnesota and the broader legal precedent.