Hilton Drops Minneapolis Hotel That Lied About Immigration Agent Ban

The Department of Homeland Security disclosed Monday that a hotel operating under the Hilton brand canceled reservations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Minnesota, triggering backlash and raising fresh concerns about corporate hostility toward federal law enforcement.

In a post on X, DHS shared a screenshot showing that a Hampton Inn in Lakeville, located south of Minneapolis, informed federal officials it was “not allowing any ICE or immigration agents to stay at our property.”

The incident quickly drew national attention, prompting Hilton to distance itself from the decision. The hospitality giant emphasized that it neither owns nor operates the Lakeville hotel, which is independently managed. Despite the clarification, Hilton’s stock dropped nearly 2.5 percent on Monday.

“This hotel is independently owned and operated, and these actions were not reflective of Hilton values,” Hilton said in a statement to Business Insider. “We have been in direct contact with the hotel, and they have apologized for the actions of their team, which was not in keeping with their policies.”

“Hilton’s position is clear: Our properties are open to everyone and we do not tolerate any form of discrimination,” the statement added, per Business Insider.

Everpeak Hospitality, which owns the Lakeville Hampton Inn, also issued a statement Tuesday acknowledging the controversy and walking back the hotel’s actions.

The incident was “inconsistent with our policy of being a welcoming place for all,” the company said. “We are in touch with the impacted guests to ensure they are accommodated. We do not discriminate against any individuals or agencies and apologize to those impacted,” according to BI.

Hilton’s 2025 proxy statement lists Vanguard and BlackRock as the company’s largest known shareholders, holding approximately 10.6 percent and 8.5 percent of common stock, respectively. Like most global hotel chains, Hilton primarily licenses its brand to independently owned and operated properties rather than directly managing them.

The controversy unfolds as President Donald Trump continues his second-term push for aggressive immigration enforcement, making border security and deportations a central pillar of his law-and-order agenda.

Since returning to office, Trump has directed DHS to dramatically increase arrests and removals of noncitizens with criminal records. Administration officials say enforcement efforts have focused on violent offenders, individuals with pending criminal charges, and migrants who illegally reentered the country after prior deportations. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has stated that hundreds of thousands of “criminal noncitizens” have been arrested during the administration’s first nine months.

President Trump has also moved to scale back Temporary Protected Status, targeting Biden-era extensions that allowed migrants from countries such as South Sudan, Haiti, Venezuela, and Afghanistan to remain in the United States. The administration argues that conditions in those nations no longer justify blanket protections, though several terminations remain tied up in federal court.

At the southern border, the Trump administration has reinstated stricter enforcement policies, expanded expedited removals, and dismantled parole programs introduced under former President Joe Biden, including the CBP One app. Officials have said those programs fueled illegal migration and strained federal resources.

Trump has further authorized expanded cooperation between federal immigration agencies and local law enforcement, while deploying National Guard units and additional federal personnel to assist operations in major cities. Democrats and immigration advocacy groups have criticized the measures, but the administration maintains they are necessary to restore sovereignty, protect public safety, and deter illegal immigration.

Last month, DHS finalized additional enforcement rules expanding biometric screening at U.S. borders. The regulation, titled “Collection of Biometric Data from Aliens Upon Entry to and Departure from the United States,” authorizes Customs and Border Protection to collect facial biometric data from all non–U.S. citizens entering or leaving the country.

As the administration presses forward, the Minnesota hotel incident has become a flashpoint in the broader cultural and political fight over immigration enforcement — and whether private businesses should be allowed to undermine federal law.