A Minnesota federal judge quashed an attempt by the Justice Department to subpoena Democratic Gov. Tim Walz and other top state officials, ruling that the Trump administration was trying to harass political rivals rather than conduct a legitimate investigation.

Minneapolis US District Judge Patrick Schiltz’s scathing ruling was issued last week, but was unsealed on Monday.

“Initiating a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action, particularly official action that the federal government cannot directly require those political opponents to take, is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use [of] the grand-jury process,” Schiltz wrote in his 29-page order.

“The only question, then, is whether the challenged subpoenas were issued for one of these forbidden purposes. The Court has no doubt that they were,” added the judge, a George W. Bush appointee.

The DOJ targeted Walz, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, as well as the boards of commissioners in Ramsey and Hennepin counties.

“The challenged subpoenas are extraordinarily broad. They are directed to a wide swath of the state’s political leadership, including the governor, the attorney general, the mayors of the state’s two largest cities, and the boards of the state’s two largest counties,” Schiltz wrote.

“They seek materials that largely, if not entirely, relate to constitutionally protected conduct.”

DOJ officials had issued the subpoenas during the thick of the Operation Metro Surge immigration enforcement effort in Minnesota earlier this year.

The crackdown had sparked widespread local backlash, particularly after the January shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti at the hands of federal immigration enforcement agents.

Two examples the DOJ cited to justify the subpoenas were advocacy by members of the Minneapolis City Council.

“[T]he connection between them and any possible criminal conduct is so remote as to be spurious,” Schiltz chided. “The Department suggests … that dissemination of that information could, in turn, result in other individuals evading or interfering with future ICE activity.”

“This reasoning piles speculation upon speculation, while also taking aim at perfectly legal-indeed, constitutionally protected-behavior.”

Walz cheered the decision as a “victory for the rule of law and our democracy.”

“The U.S. Justice Department is pursuing criminal investigations into the President’s political opponents,” Walz said. “This case was just one example of that, but we are seeing daily reminders of this administration’s lawlessness – in Minnesota and around the country.”