Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., on Tuesday accused Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem of spreading “lies and propaganda” regarding ICE arrests in Minnesota.

Omar was responding to Noem’s X post stating that federal officials have “arrested over 10,000 criminal illegal aliens who were killing Americans, hurting children and reigning terror in Minneapolis,” including “3,000 criminal illegal aliens” in the last six weeks.

Under Noem’s post, the secretary shared dozens of photos of who she described as criminal illegal aliens.

“This would be amazing if it wasn’t full of lies and propaganda,” Omar wrote. “The only reason she has photos of these criminals in prison is because they were already in prison. Stop terrorizing people with your fake PR about criminals in Minneapolis because the only people on the streets of Minneapolis you are arresting are law abiding citizens.”

NOEM HAMMERS WALZ, FREY FOR IGNORING 1,360 ICE DETAINERS FOR CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS

Fox News Digital reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment but did not immediately hear back.

Omar, who was born in Somalia and whose district covers much of Minneapolis, has been outspoken against the Trump administration and its deployment of ICE agents amid crackdowns on illegal immigration and fraud in the city and state.

TRUMP ASSERTS ILHAN OMAR SHOULD BE JAILED OR BOOTED TO SOMALIA

With the killing of Renee Good by an ICE agent as a flash point, critics say ICE agents are engaging in strong-arm tactics meant to intimidate the populace.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Minneapolis and St. Paul are already hosting some 3,000 federal agents deployed there after a massive fraud scandal rocked the state late last year. President Donald Trump has floated invoking the Insurrection Act to quell unrest in the state, although he appeared to back off the idea on Friday.

Fox News’ Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON  — Do licensed gun owners have a right to carry a loaded weapon into stores, restaurants and other private places that are open to the public?

California and Hawaii are among five states with new laws that forbid carrying firearms onto private property without the consent of an owner or manager. But the Trump administration joined gun-rights advocates on Tuesday in urging the Supreme Court to strike down these laws as unconstitutional under the 2nd Amendment.

Such a law “effectively nullifies licenses to carry arms in public,” Trump’s lawyers said.

If you “stop at a gasoline station, you are committing a crime,” Deputy Solicitor Gen. Sarah Harris told the court.

An attorney representing Hawaii said the issue is one of property rights, not gun rights.

“An invitation to shop is not an invitation to bring your Glock,” Washington attorney Neal Katyal told the court. “There is no constitutional right to enter property that includes a right to bring firearms.”

The justices sounded split along the usual ideological lines, with the court’s conservatives signaling they are likely to strike down the new laws in five Democratic-led states.

“You are relegating the 2nd Amendment to second-class status,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. told Katyal.

He said the court had ruled law-abiding persons have a right to carry a firearm for self-defense when they leave home. That would include going to stores or businesses that are open to the public.

“If the owners don’t like guns, why don’t they just put up a sign?” Alito said.

Both sides agreed that business owners are generally free to allow or prohibit guns on their property. However, state officials said, the laws are important because business owners rarely post signs that either welcome or forbid the carrying of guns.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the 2nd Amendment should have the same standing as the 1st Amendment.

He said it was understood based on the 1st Amendment that a political candidate may walk up to a house and knock on the door or drop off a pamphlet. He questioned why the court should uphold a law that limits gun owners from entering places that are open to the public.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh said they too believed the “right to keep and bear arms” included the right to carry weapons, including into stores.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson said property rights should prevail over gun rights.

“Is there a right to go on private property with a gun?” Sotomayor asked repeatedly. She said the court had never upheld such a broad right.

But with the possible exception of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, none of the conservatives agreed.

Four years ago, the court ruled law-abiding gun owners had a right to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense when they left home. They also said then that guns may be prohibited in “sensitive places” but they did not decide what that meant.

In the wake of that decision, California, Hawaii, New York, New Jersey and Maryland adopted new laws that restricted carrying guns in public places, including parks and beaches.

The laws also said gun owners may not take a gun into a privately owned business without the “express authorization” of an owner or manager. California’s law went a step further and said the owner must post a clear sign allowing guns.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the laws from Hawaii and California, except for the required posting of a sign in California.

Three Hawaii residents with concealed carry permits appealed to the Supreme Court and won the backing of the Trump administration.