Federal investigators in the United States are reportedly examining whether a woman fatally shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent had connections to activist groups opposing President Donald Trump's immigration policies. This development comes as the Department of Justice's civil rights division has notably not opened an inquiry into the agent's actions.
Details of the Fatal Incident and Investigation
The FBI has taken over the investigation into the shooting of Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, which occurred last Wednesday in Minneapolis. Agents are conducting a thorough review, analysing the actions of ICE agent Jonathan Ross and physical evidence, including the handgun used. Local police have been removed from the probe.
However, sources indicate the Justice Department's civil rights division, which typically handles police-involved shootings, has not opened a case into whether Ross violated Good's federal rights and is not expected to do so soon. Instead, according to The New York Times, the focus is shifting towards activists involved in Minneapolis 'ICE watch' activities, whom federal authorities reportedly view as potential 'instigators'.
Victim's Role and Conflicting Narratives
It remains unclear if Good, besides participating in the protest on the day she died, was involved in broader activism. Witnesses stated she and her wife, Rebecca, were acting as legal observers and filming the event. In emotional footage, Rebecca admitted encouraging Good to confront agents, crying, 'I made her come down here, it's my fault.'
Friends, however, claim Good became engaged through her six-year-old son's charter school and its local 'ICE Watch group,' a coalition aiming to disrupt immigration raids. 'She was a warrior. She died doing what was right,' a fellow parent told The New York Post, adding Good had received 'very thorough training'.
Newly released surveillance footage shows Good apparently blocking a road with her Honda Pilot SUV for four minutes before the shooting. Roughly twenty seconds after she stopped, a passenger, believed to be Rebecca, exited and began filming. The video then shows an officer approaching the SUV, grabbing the door handle, and allegedly demanding she open it.
Good's vehicle then moved forward, prompting Ross to draw his weapon and fire three shots while jumping back. It is not clear from videos if the SUV made contact with him. After the shooting, the vehicle struck two parked cars before stopping.
Political Fallout and Redefining 'Domestic Terrorism'
The Trump administration swiftly defended Ross's actions. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem labelled Good's actions 'an act of domestic terrorism,' describing Ross as an experienced professional who followed his training. President Trump called Good a 'professional agitator' and claimed the shooting was in 'self-defence,' later reiterating that she was 'very violent' and 'very radical.'
Experts criticise this rapid characterisation. Thomas E. Brzozowski, former counsel for domestic terrorism at the DOJ, told the Times that a deliberate process once existed to classify such acts. 'When it's not followed, then the term becomes little more than a political cudgel to bash one's enemies,' he stated.
This shift follows a recent memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi that significantly expanded the federal definition of domestic terrorism. It now includes not only violent crimes like rioting but also acts like impeding law enforcement or 'doxxing' officers. The memo links terrorism to advancing 'political and social agendas,' explicitly citing opposition to immigration enforcement and 'hostility towards traditional views.'
'If you're an investigator in the field, you can't simply run away from this new definition,' Brzozowski added. 'You have to deal with it.'
Legal Challenges from Minnesota
Meanwhile, Minnesota officials are mounting a legal challenge against the Trump administration's immigration enforcement surge in the state. Their lawsuit seeks a federal court declaration that 'Operation Metro Surge' is unconstitutional and unlawful, arguing it is arbitrary as other states do not face similar crackdowns.
The suit also requests a ban on officers threatening force against individuals not subject to immigration arrest and aims to prevent arrests of US citizens and visa holders without probable cause of a crime. It alleges the federal government is targeting Minnesota for political reasons, a potential First Amendment violation, rather than genuinely combating fraud as claimed.
