As immigration raids roil Minnesota, corporate leaders stay silent

Americans everywhere, but especially those based in Minnesota, remain on edge and upset in the wake of a wave of immigration arrests and the killing of Renee Good, a 37-year-old U.S. citizen, by an ICE agent.

One set of important local voices have been noticeably quiet: executives from many of the state's leading corporations. “Marketplace Morning Report” host David Brancaccio spoke with Marketplace's senior economics contributor Chris Farrell in St. Paul, Minnesota, about how business leaders are responding to the moment. The following is an edited transcript of their conversation.

David Brancaccio: Minnesota has headquarters for some very high-profile businesses. I'm thinking 3M, Target, Best Buy, General Mills, many more — some of them have been right at the center of the immigration enforcement immigration raids in their stores, employees detained. In some cases, there have been calls for firms to protect employees and customers. What have been the public statements from big companies, given everything we've seen in the past week or so?

Chris Farrell: Well, David, there have been very few public statements so far. Generally, companies have said, “Look, they can't stop immigration officials from entering public spaces,” and that's right. But here's the thing: Prominent executives served on nonprofit boards. They weigh in on workforce issues, and they tap their corporate foundations and personal pockets to support community initiatives. So with that history, with that background, corporate Minnesota's silence about increased federal immigration enforcement is striking.

Brancaccio: Now, the administration's promise is that strict immigration policy will lead to more and better jobs for citizens. But, I mean, we've seen calculations right, that this immigration enforcement has had negative effects, a negative impact, on Minnesota's economy.

Farrell: Well, local businesses, they're saying, “We have fewer customers.” Employers say some workers are too afraid to come for their shifts — farmers, restaurateurs, construction firms, just to name a few of the vulnerable industries, warn repeatedly about labor shortages and production bottlenecks from the crackdown.

Brancaccio: What explains the retreat from the public square by large companies in Minnesota on these issues?

Farrell: Minnesota's leading companies, they're national — they're global corporations, and the local economy is less important, says Louis Johnston, professor of economics at The College of St. Benedict and St. John's University.

Johnston: When you're looking at those kinds of things, it's better to keep quiet or to be as uncontroversial as possible and not take a side.

Brancaccio: And Chris, the general political environment is volatile, and the rhetoric can be intense. Some will say vicious?

Farrell: Executives seem concerned that if they raise objections, their company might find itself dealing with political retaliation, regulatory scrutiny, perhaps a consumer boycott, or some combination.

Brancaccio: Once upon a time, CEOs, I think, were more prone to taking stands on public issues. The term was CEO activism.

Farrell: Political scientist Samuel Huntington famously dubbed this mindset Davos Man, a multinational corporate elite confident in his problem-solving insights involving the world's most pressing issues. These days, CEOs are focused on navigating multiple uncertainties like tariffs and geopolitical upheavals. But here's the thing, David, you know, in Minnesota and elsewhere, there are concerns that silence will exact a long-term price. Here's R.T. Rybak, a former mayor of Minneapolis:

Rybak: The bigger threat is if we lose our competitive advantage of having a culturally fluent workforce that continues to grow.

Farrell: Rybak is now the head of the Minneapolis Foundation.