A federal magistrate has ordered 56-year-old Anthony James Kazmierczak held in custody until trial after prosecutors said his alleged spraying of Rep. Ilhan Omar with apple cider vinegar showed he was a danger to the community, while his attorney warned that the decision effectively leaves him in solitary confinement and raises concerns about his health.
The case, which stems from a town hall event in Minneapolis where Omar was discussing immigration policy, now sits at the intersection of state and federal authority, pretrial detention standards, and the security of elected officials. According to Fox News, Kazmierczak is charged in Hennepin County with one felony count of terroristic threats and one count of fifth-degree assault, and federal prosecutors have also brought charges related to the same incident.
Pretrial Detention and the Judge’s Ruling
At a detention hearing, U.S. Magistrate Judge David Schultz concluded that Kazmierczak should remain behind bars while the case proceeds. According to Fox News, the judge found that Kazmierczak, although not considered a flight risk, posed a danger to the community in light of the charges pending in Hennepin County.
Under federal law, pretrial detention is typically reserved for cases where a judge finds that no combination of release conditions can reasonably assure public safety or a defendant’s appearance in court. The Fox News account does not quote Schultz’s full reasoning from the bench, but it reports that he tied his decision to the seriousness of the alleged conduct during a public political event and the nature of the state charges.
The order means Kazmierczak will stay in custody as both the state and any federal case move forward, unless a higher court revisits or overturns the detention decision at a later stage.
Competing Accounts of the Risk
The basic facts described by prosecutors and defense counsel are not in significant dispute. According to Fox News, Kazmierczak allegedly approached Omar during a town hall and used a syringe to spray her with a liquid later identified as apple cider vinegar. Minneapolis police reported that he allegedly admitted to squirting vinegar on the congresswoman.
Where the sides sharply diverge is on the level of danger that the act represents. Court-appointed defense attorney John Fossum argued that the liquid was relatively harmless and that the “risk of harm” to Omar was “actually quite small,” according to Fox News. He framed the episode as far less serious than the charges suggest.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin Bejar, by contrast, emphasized the potential for physical injury rather than the substance’s everyday uses. Fox News reports that Bejar told the court, “Certainly that would cause bodily injury if that got in Rep. Omar’s eyes. We simply cannot have protesters and people, whatever side of the aisle you’re on, running up to a representative conducting official business.”
Omar briefly stepped back and appeared shaken after being sprayed, then resumed speaking and continued addressing the crowd for at least another ten minutes, according to the same reporting. That sequence has given both sides material to work with: prosecutors pointing to the deliberate targeting of a sitting member of Congress, and the defense underscoring that Omar was able to continue the event.
State Charges, Federal Scrutiny, and Political Context
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty has publicly framed the case as both a personal assault on Omar and a test of how politics intersects with public safety. In a statement quoted by Fox News and posted on her office’s website, Moriarty called the incident “a disturbing assault on Rep. Omar, who is frequently the target of vilifying language by fellow elected officials and members of the public.”
Anthony Kazmierczak arrested for spraying Rep. Omar faces federal assault charge
https://t.co/rkP8jECxP0 https://t.co/nnzPp7DGwW
— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) January 30, 2026
Moriarty also pointed to concerns about how federal decision-making interacts with local prosecutions. “The trust of our community in the federal government keeping politics out of public safety has been eroded by their actions,” she said, adding, “A state-level conviction is not subject to a presidential pardon now or in the future.”
Her comments highlight a key legal reality. A state conviction in Minnesota would remain outside any future presidential clemency regardless of how federal authorities handle overlapping charges. At the same time, the presence of parallel state and federal cases can create a complex procedural landscape, including questions about sentencing exposure and the sequence of trials.
The alleged assault took place while Omar was criticizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and calling for the agency’s abolition, according to Fox News. She also reportedly said that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem should resign or “face impeachment.” That political backdrop may shape how the public views the case, but in court, the focus will fall on the specific statutes and evidence, not the content of Omar’s remarks.
Solitary Confinement, Health Claims, and Jail Authority
Fossum told the court that Kazmierczak appeared in a yellow jumpsuit, which he said signified that his client was being held in solitary confinement, according to Fox News. He used that detail to raise alarms about Kazmierczak’s mental state behind bars.
The defense also described significant health issues. Fossum said his client is in poor health and suffers from Parkinson’s disease and sleep apnea. Those conditions, he argued, should weigh against continued detention and in favor of less restrictive release conditions or at least different custodial arrangements.
The Fox News account does not indicate that Judge Schultz explicitly ordered solitary confinement. Typically, once a judge orders detention, classifications such as administrative segregation or solitary are made by local jail officials, not by the court, although judges can respond if attorneys file motions about conditions of confinement.
That distinction is important to the procedural posture of the case. The judge’s legal authority at this stage is primarily over whether Kazmierczak is detained or released, and under what conditions, not over the specific tier or unit where he is housed. If the defense believes solitary confinement is unwarranted or harmful, it may have to pursue that claim directly with jail administration or through a separate legal challenge.
Past Convictions and Risk Assessments
According to Fox News, court records show that Kazmierczak has prior convictions for driving while intoxicated in 2009 and 2010. For the 2010 case, he reportedly served one day in jail followed by five years of supervised probation. For the 2009 conviction, records indicate he was placed on home detention for 30 days.
While those offenses are not violent, prior convictions can factor into pretrial risk assessments. Prosecutors may cite them as evidence of a pattern of lawbreaking, while defense attorneys often argue that older, less serious convictions should not drive detention decisions in a new, unrelated case.
For now, the public record as reflected in Fox News reporting does not detail exactly how much weight Judge Schultz gave to Kazmierczak’s prior record compared with the alleged conduct at Omar’s town hall. That gap is common in detention hearings, where judges frequently deliver oral findings without written opinions.
What Remains Unresolved
Several key questions remain unanswered. The existing reporting does not clarify whether additional security assessments will be conducted for Omar’s future events, or whether Congress will respond in any formal way to the incident. It also does not indicate whether Kazmierczak will seek a new detention hearing if his health worsens or if jail conditions change.
As the case moves forward, state prosecutors in Hennepin County and federal authorities will need to decide how to coordinate their efforts, including potential plea negotiations or trial scheduling. The central legal issue, however, remains straightforward. A judge has found that an alleged vinegar spraying at a political event is serious enough to justify pretrial detention, while the defense insists the risk was low and the current conditions are too harsh. How courts ultimately balance community safety, the rights of an accused person, and the realities of jail confinement will determine what happens next.
