It’s been more than 50 years since a Republican won Minnesota in a presidential election, but former President Trump says he’s got “a really good shot” of breaking the losing streak this November in his 2024 rematch with President Biden.

The former president is in the historically reliable blue state Friday evening to headline the Minnesota GOP’s annual Lincoln Reagan fundraising dinner. He began his speech with the usual jabs at Biden’s cognitive ability, but also referenced the recently agreed to debates between the two.

“He’s going to be so jacked up for those, you watch,” Trump joked, later saying he was going to “demand a drug test” for Biden before the debate.

BIDEN CAMPAIGN HIGH ON DOJ’S MARIJUANA SHIFT, ‘SMOKES’ TRUMP FOR INACTION DURING HIS TERM

He went on to promise a rollback of Biden’s environmental mandates relating to automakers, railed against the sour economic statistics under Biden, and vowed to fix the ongoing border crisis.

Trump also blasted Biden’s habit of repeating false stories concerning his life experiences. “He’s so full of s–t,” Trump said as the crowd laughed.

Trump lost Minnesota by just 1½ points in his 2016 presidential election victory over Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Four years ago, he lost the state to President Biden by more than seven points in his unsuccessful re-election campaign.

Ahead of the 2020 election, Trump promised a victory in Minnesota, saying that if he lost, “I’m never coming back.”

FIRST ON FOX: TOP JEWISH GOP GROUP STEPS UP FUNDRAISING FOR TRUMP AMID ANTI-ISRAEL COLLEGE CAMPUS PROTESTS 

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at the annual Lincoln Reagan Dinner hosted by the Minnesota Republican party on May 17, 2024 in St. Paul, Minnesota.  (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Fast-forward four years and Trump is back and once again predicting a victory.

“We think we have a really good shot at Minnesota,” Trump emphasized in an interview Wednesday with KSTP, a local TV station in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul. “We have great friendships up there.”

Trump added that he’s “worked hard on Minnesota” and that “Tom Emmer is very much involved,” pointing to the House majority whip.

Emmer, who is joining Trump at the state GOP gala, is chairing the Trump campaign in Minnesota even though the former president and his allies helped sink Emmer’s bid last autumn to become House speaker.

As the Trump and Biden campaigns prepare for battle in seven crucial swing states that decided the 2020 election (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which were narrowly won by Biden, and North Carolina, which Trump carried by a razor-thin margin) and will likely once again in the 2024 rematch, both campaigns see opportunities to expand the map.

WARNING SIGNS FOR TRUMP, BIDEN, AS THEY CAREEN TOWARD DEBATES 

Two weekends ago at a closed-door Republican National Committee retreat for top-dollar donors  at a resort in Palm Beach, Florida, senior Trump campaign advisers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita and veteran pollster Tony Fabrizio spotlighted internal surveys that suggested both “Minnesota and Virginia are clearly in play.”

“In both states, Trump finds himself in positions to flip key electoral votes in his favor,” the survey, which was shared with Fox News, emphasizes. 

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump attends the annual Lincoln Reagan Dinner hosted by the Minnesota Republican party on May 17, 2024 in St. Paul, Minnesota. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

And both states have sizable populations of rural white voters without college degrees who disproportionately support the former president.

Biden’s campaign disagrees that either Minnesota or Virginia are up for grabs.

While noting they are “not taking any state or any vote for granted,” Biden campaign battleground states director Dan Kanninen told reporters last week “we don’t see polls that are six or seven months out from a general election, head-to-head numbers certainly, as any more predictive than a weather report is six or seven months out.”

Kanninen highlighted that the campaign has teams on the ground in both states engaging voters.

“We feel strongly the Biden-Harris coalition in both Minnesota and Virginia, which has been strong in the midterms and off-year elections, will continue to be strong for us in the fall of 2024,” he added.

And Biden campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt, pointing to the president’s current fundraising dominance and ground-game advantage in the key battlegrounds, argued “Trump’s team has so little campaign or infrastructure to speak of they’re resorting to leaking memos that say ‘the polls we paid for show us winning.’” 

But Democratic Rep. Dean Phillips of Minnesota, who launched a long-shot and unsuccessful primary challenge against the president, insists “Minnesota’s in play.”

Phillips, in an interview this week on Fox News’ “Special Edition,” argued Minnesota’s “like a lot of states that I think a lot of my fellow Democrats don’t want to confess is the reality. … I’m telling my Democratic colleagues who are supporting President Biden, myself included, that there’s a lot of work to do.”

While Trump’s campaign looks for opportunities to expand the map in Minnesota and Virginia, Biden’s campaign appears to be eyeing swing state North Carolina and Florida. 

Trump carried the Sunshine State by less than four points in 2020, but two years ago, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and GOP Sen. Marco Rubio each won re-election by nearly 20 points.

LaCivita argued the Biden campaign was playing “a faux game” in both states but insisted Trump has a “real opportunity in expanding the map in Virginia and Minnesota.”

Trump’s stop in Minnesota comes a week after he held a large rally in Wildwood, New Jersey, a red bastion in an overwhelming blue state where no Republican has carried the state in a presidential election in over three decades. Trump lost the state to Biden by 16 points four years ago.

“We’re going to win New Jersey,” Trump vowed at the rally.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

A federal judge in Los Angeles has ruled that a tactic used by federal immigration agents in Southern California to arrest people in their homes without a judicial warrant is unconstitutional and must end.

The judgment — issued Wednesday against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency — involves so-called knock and talk practices.

ICE didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocates argued that the immigration agency rarely obtains judicial warrants and instead counts on immigrants answering their doors voluntarily. Advocates alleged agents routinely misrepresent themselves as police to gain entry so they can carry out an arrest.

Immigrant advocacy groups praised the ruling.

“It is a basic human right for immigrants to feel safe in their own homes and live without fear,” Lizbeth Abeln, interim director at the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, wrote in a news release Thursday. “This won’t undo the years of harm done by ICE, but it is a good first step towards justice.”

The order applies only to ICE’s Los Angeles field office, which includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. An expert witness said that available data showed ICE’s knock and talk methods accounted for at least 8% of arrests in 2022.

Four examples listed in the order — occurring between 2017 and 2020 — illustrate instances in which immigration agents entered constitutionally protected areas around a person’s home, such as their porch, patio or backyard, to make contact for an arrest.

Advocates said the practice has continued since then in Los Angeles and across the country.

U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II rejected ICE’s argument that its agents could enter the private areas surrounding a home to knock on the door because mail carriers and delivery people routinely do so.

Immigration agents walk up to a resident’s home without consent and, when the person opens the door, the agents “generally state that they are ‘conducting an investigation,’” according to the order. ICE policies and training encourage agents to use knock and talks, calling the practice one of the four primary methods of apprehension.

“Despite often stating a different purpose for their visit, the true ‘intent’ and ‘actual purpose’ behind a ‘knock and talk’ is to make an immigration arrest,” the judge wrote.

The agents would be permitted to enter those areas if their goal was merely to ask questions, Wright wrote. But he said the Constitution prohibits them from doing so “without a judicial warrant with the intent to arrest the occupant.”

“The more accurate title,” Wright wrote, “would be ‘knock and arrests.’”

The ruling stems from a 2020 class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of two local advocacy organizations, the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, as well as one individual, Osny Sorto-Vasquez Kidd.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, the UC Irvine School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic, and the law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson represented the plaintiffs.

“Do you know what we’re here for? You know we’re here about AG.” “I don’t think you know what you’re here for.” “Well, you’re the one talking about —” “I think your fake eyelashes are messing up —” “Ain’t nothing —” “Hold on, hold on.” [gavel pounding] “Order.” “Mr. Chairman.” “That’s beneath even you —” “Order, order. Regain order of your committee.” “I would like to move to take down Ms. Greene’s words. That is absolutely unacceptable. How dare you attack the physical appearance of another person.” “Are your feelings hurt?” “Move her words, down.” “Aww.” “Oh, oh girl, baby girl.” “Oh, really?” “Don’t even play.” “Baby girl. I don’t think —” “We are going to move and we’re going to take your words down.” “I second that motion.” “You agree to strike your words?” “Yeah.” “O.K. — Ms. Greene agrees to strike her words.” “I believe she should apologize. No, no, no.” “Hold on. Then, after Mr. Perry’s going to be recognized, then —” “I’m not apologizing.” “Well, then you’re not striking your words.” “You reserve the right to object.” “I am not apologizing.” “Just to better understand your ruling: If someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody’s bleached blonde, bad-built butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct?” “A what now?” “Chariman, I make, I make a motion to strike those words.” “I don’t think that’s —” “I’m trying to find clarification on what —” “Chairman, motion to strike those words.” We’re not, we’re not going to do this. Look, you guys earlier, literally just —” “You just voted to do this.” “Y’all did it first.” “You just voted to do it.” “Order, order.” “I’m trying to get clarification.” “Look — calm down. Calm down.” “No, no, no, no because this is what you all do. So I’m trying to get —” “Ms. Crockett, you’re not recognized.”