Target faces pressure after agents detained employees in store

Videos showing federal agents detaining two Target employees in the vestibule of a Richfield store circulated widely on social media on Jan. 13, 2026, setting off community protests outside the location and renewed scrutiny of how retailers handle law enforcement activity on their premises. The incident occurred amid a broader federal immigration enforcement operation across the Twin Cities, and it quickly raised questions about employee safety, company policy and legal limits on retailer authority.

Target, which is headquartered in Minneapolis, declined to issue a public statement about the detentions but sent internal messages to staff after the episode. Those communications were intended to reassure workers and outline immediate expectations, yet community leaders and activists pressed the company for more explicit protections for team members and guests. Protesters gathered at the Richfield store demanding clearer rules about how and when enforcement activity should be allowed inside or near stores.

Legally, retailers operate with constrained options. Companies generally have limited ability to bar law enforcement from public areas of their stores, meaning managers often cannot physically block agents who enter open, public-facing spaces. That reality complicates operational responses for store leaders trying to balance compliance with law enforcement, guest safety, and the welfare of employees who may be directly affected by enforcement actions.

For workers, the incident amplified existing anxieties. Team members in stores across the region told colleagues they worry about unexpected encounters with enforcement agents, potential disruptions to guest service, and unclear guidance from corporate on how to respond. Store-level managers face a difficult task: de-escalate situations in real time, protect staff and guests, and follow company protocols while complying with the law.

The reputational impact is notable because Target’s headquarters sit in the Minneapolis area, where local elected officials and advocacy groups have been outspoken about immigration enforcement policies. Activists are pressing for more transparent corporate policies, better training for employees on handling encounters with law enforcement, and clearer escalation paths for managers when enforcement activity occurs inside or adjacent to stores.

The takeaway? Employers need policies that go beyond general counsel memos: practical, scenario-based training for frontline leaders, clear communication channels for immediate incidents, and a playbook that reconciles legal constraints with staff safety. Our two cents? If you work in a store, ask your manager for clarity on the steps to take if law enforcement shows up, document any incident, and push leadership to make training and protections concrete rather than just reassuring statements.