# Pre-Hire Justification policy *Minnesota DHS hiring policy filed as the operative exhibit in a federal Title VII challenge* The Pre-Hire Justification policy is a signed agency policy of the [[Minnesota]] DHS. It was filed as Exhibit B in *[[United States v. State of Minnesota (0:26-cv-00273)|United States v. State of Minnesota]]*, No. 0:26-cv-00273 (D. Minn.), a suit the United States filed on January 14, 2026.[^1] The exhibit carries the policy's "[[Non-underrepresented candidate|non-underrepresented candidate]]" language.[^1] The complaint challenges the policy under [[Title VII]] (§§703(a)(1), (a)(2)) and pleads its claims through *Bostock* textualism.[^1] It was filed after [[Executive Order 11246]] was revoked. The project's source describes that order as the federal predicate the architecture once rested on.[^3] EO 14173 revoked it on January 21, 2025.[^1] The complaint cites [[§43A.191]] eight times.[^1] The project's companion analysis, *The Instrument No One Will Name*, finds that neither party names the suit in the corpus it reviews. It also states that this finding "convicts no one."[^3] The case was ongoing as of that source's refresh on June 18, 2026.[^1] ## Background ### Federal predicate EO 14173 revoked Executive Order 11246 on January 21, 2025.[^1] The United States filed its suit against the State on January 14, 2026, after that revocation.[^1][^3] ## In the Minnesota record ### Who - The Minnesota DHS Hiring/Pre-Hire Justification policy was filed as Exhibit B in *United States v. State of Minnesota*, No. 0:26-cv-00273.[^2] - The United States is the plaintiff and the State of Minnesota is the defendant.[^1] ### What - The policy is a signed agency document. It was filed as the operative Exhibit B, which contains the "non-underrepresented candidate" language.[^1] ### Where - The policy is at issue in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.[^1] ### When - January 21, 2025: EO 14173 revoked Executive Order 11246.[^1] - January 14, 2026: the United States filed the case.[^1] - February 27, 2026: the State's response was due.[^1] ### Why - The complaint pleads Title VII claims under §§703(a)(1) and (a)(2) through *Bostock* textualism.[^1] - The suit was brought after the revocation of Executive Order 11246, which the source identifies as the architecture's former federal predicate.[^3] ### How - The source gives a structural reading of the policy. It describes the policy as a [[Declarative switch|declarative switch]], which must be written down to operate. On this reading, the phrase that operates within the policy is the same phrase quoted back and attached as the federal exhibit. The source marks this as a structural reading and marks the exhibit itself as primary-confirmed.[^2] ### How many - The complaint cites §43A.191 eight times. The source reports this as a count confirmed in prior validation.[^1] ## Active matters *United States v. State of Minnesota*, No. 0:26-cv-00273 (D. Minn., filed January 14, 2026), is a Title VII challenge to the DHS Hiring/Pre-Hire Justification policy. The State's response was due February 27, 2026.[^1] The case is before a three-judge district court.[^3] The panel consists of Circuit Judge [[Raymond W. Gruender]], Chief Judge [[Patrick J. Schiltz]] of the District of Minnesota, and Judge [[D. Price Marshall Jr.]] of the Eastern District of Arkansas. Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins is assigned after Foster's recusal.[^1] The source records the case as ongoing as of June 18, 2026. It lists justice.gov/crt, federalregister.gov, clearinghouse.net case 47712 and CourtListener 72142517 as its records for the case.[^1] ## See also - [[United States v. State of Minnesota (0:26-cv-00273)]] - [[Executive Order 11246]] - [[Non-underrepresented candidate]] - [[Declarative switch]] - [[§43A.191]] ## Notes [^1]: Minnesota wiki project, *The Instrument No One Will Name* (densified, refreshed 2026-06-18), note [53]. Establishes the docket, filing date, Title VII sections, *Bostock* pleading, Exhibit B and its "non-underrepresented candidate" language, the revocation by EO 14173 on Jan. 21, 2025, the panel, the Feb. 27, 2026 response date, the case's ongoing status, and the eight citations of §43A.191. The source marks it primary-confirmed; no URL for it is in the pack. [^2]: Minnesota wiki project, *The Instrument No One Will Name* (densified, 2026-06-18), note [5]. Gives the write-to-operate structural reading and identifies the DHS Hiring/Pre-Hire Justification policy as Exhibit B in No. 0:26-cv-00273. The source marks the reading as structural and the exhibit as primary-confirmed; no URL for it is in the pack. [^3]: Minnesota wiki project, *The Instrument No One Will Name* (densified, 2026-06-18), section "The shared fact". Records that Executive Order 11246 was the predicate the architecture rested on, that the suit is before a three-judge district court, and that the suit is named by neither party. The source states that this finding "convicts no one." No URL for it is in the pack.