Below is my column on Fox.com on Democratic politicians and pundits immediately declaring that the ICE officer in Minneapolis is a murderer. There is a method to this madness for politicians such as Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) who are facing primary challenges from the far left. He and others sit like Madam Defarge, simply knitting the names of expendable officers to fuel the mob.
Here is the column:
“It was an outright murder.” Those words from Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) were echoed by Democratic leaders from coast to coast almost immediately after an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, 37, as she sped toward him in a vehicle. Goldman is the Madame Defarge of American politics, the character from Tale of Two Cities who knitted as she gleefully called for the heads of aristocrats and counterrevolutionaries in the French Revolution.
Goldman has made a career of dismissing due process for his political opponents while engaging in willful blindness of the conduct of his allies. He has denied the existence of Antifa as an organization as well as claiming that he has seen no evidence of an increase in attacks on ICE officers.
He apparently needed no further proof to declare this officer a murderer: “It was an outright murder. This officer needs to not only be fired and suspended, but—based on the video—charged.”
The video does not support such a claim. Under the governing case law, the officer is allowed to use lethal force when he is facing an imminent threat to his life or the lives of fellow officers or third parties.
In this case, the officer had a fraction of a second to decide whether to fire his weapon after Good sped toward him. Good appears to have been attempting to flee the officers and flight alone is not a justification for the use of lethal force. However, when you speed toward an officer, he may treat the vehicle as a weapon and discharge his weapon in self-defense.
Goldman is fully aware that past case law supports the officer in this case. However, he is also aware that he is facing a Mamdani-supported socialist, Brad Lander, a popular local politician. Goldman is ramping up his rhetoric to appeal to the radical left from promising impeachments to calling for the prosecution of this officer. This officer is no longer a human being, he is a prop to be used for political gain. If he has to go to jail to secure a third term for Goldman, he is viewed as a small price to pay.
Others have joined the murder mantra, including Mamdani, who declared, “This morning, an ICE agent murdered a woman in Minneapolis—only the latest horror in a year full of cruelty.”
Mamdani insisted that he was going to focus on retaining existing NYPD officers rather than adding more officers. That seems unlikely as he shows that officers cannot expect him to support them if they are involved in such shootings. The mayor immediately joined the mob, dismissed the need for an investigation, and declared the officer a murderer.
In an age of rage, the loudest and angriest is king.
That was evident in the profane, unhinged diatribe of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey who immediately not only declared the officer a murderer but called claims of self-defense “bllsh*t” and told ICE “get the f–k out” of the city.
When many of us denounced his conduct, he mocked his critics by apologizing if his profanity “offended their Disney princess ears.”
Gov. Tim Walz followed suit. As his head of Public Safety insisted that they would not speculate on the outcome of the investigation, Walz stood next to him in declaring that Good was killed for no reason and portrayed ICE as terrorizing the state. Walz previously denounced ICE as “Donald Trump’s modern-day Gestapo is scooping folks up off the streets … being shipped off to foreign torture dungeons.” Ironically, he then added that these people have “no chance to mount a defense.” That concern apparently does not extend for Walz to members of law enforcement.
Goldman, Mamdani, Frey, and others are traffickers in rage, feeding an addiction in the hope that these mobs will propel them further in power. Law enforcement officers are simply expendable when political advantage is at stake.
Democrats showed the same cynical calculation in condemning border agents falsely accused of whipping migrants at the Texas border. Even though videotape refuted the claims, leading Democrats and the media pushed the false claim. The agents were then subject to over a year of abusive treatment before being cleared of the charge.
There is a method to his madness. As Madame Defarge assured her husband, they must ignore the cost to others because “Nothing that we do, is done in vain. I believe, with all my soul, that we shall see triumph.”
Democrats may indeed “see triumph” in rage politics. However, history has shown that today’s revolutionaries often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. Goldman is already facing a challenge from the left that he is not radical enough. Feeding a nation of rage addicts can prove a dangerous business when someone offers purer, cheaper highs.
For now, however, no one will out rage Goldman or others. They remain on a political hair-trigger to find triumph in the tragedies of our times.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
The latest video from the officer (the shooter) proves Renee Good was trying to avoid the officers.
In the video, the only reason the driver drove slowly in “reverse” was to change her angle. The video then shows the driver turning the steering hard-right (away from the officer) her path was away from the officer with front wheels pointed away from officer.
The video also shows the officer had recorded her license plate and that the driver wasn’t blocking the roadway. Other vehicles simply drove around.
The bigger question is why DHS and ICE officers aren’t legally required to wear functioning body cameras. This officer was preoccupied with a hand-held cell phone, then fumbled the phone to grab his gun.
This officer also had a similar traumatic event happen earlier in 2025. Maybe this officer shouldn’t have been in the field without sufficient counseling for PTSD from the previous incident. Almost all police officers nationwide are trained to not stand in front of running automobiles so accidents like this can be avoided.
Ok, it’s come to this:
Democrats: Do NOT follow illegal orders!
It’s also important to remember that most of the immigrants Trump is picking up are not hardened criminals but blue collar workers that sometimes work 12 days. He lied about targeting the worst of the worst criminals.
So there is a very minimal need for any guns at all and no need for masked agents playing dress up. Most of the targets are more hard working than most Americans, not prone to violence like the agents are.
Today a former FBI official said that ICE should focus on finding people early in the morning at their homes (safest best practice). It’s safer for both the agents and the people they are picking up. It is extremely careless to mess with anyone while in a running automobile.
Even Trump supporters should support solving this problem.
Every president is entitled to choose his own cabinet members and political appointees. Republicans want a Republican staff and Democrats want a Democrat staff.
Regardless of politics, shouldn’t Americans have competent government servants? Not just sufficient experience running a particular agency, but maybe more important judgement and knowledge of constitutional law.
Wouldn’t simply appointing competent agency heads that are proficient in their agency’s mission save lives? Trump simply putting people with no experience, no judgement, no maturity and no knowledge of their Oath of Office limitations can literally kill innocent people.
We all remember Bush’s famous quote “Heck of a job Brownie” that costs thousands of lives during Hurricane Katrina. Bush was referring to Michael Brown. Brown was an intelligent person but had experience running the International Arabian Horse Association was put in charge of FEMA hurricane recovery.
The USA has 350 million people, Trump can’t find any competent Republicans to run these agencies?
Another way to interpret the latest video.
Renee Good’s car apparently was already in “drive” mode, with her foot on the brake waiting for her passenger to get in.
The car apparently wasn’t in “park” mode when the ICE officer (very quickly) stuck his hand through the window.
So it’s very possible she simply panicked, instead of placing the car in “park”, she instead pointed the wheels away from any agents.
It should be noted that ICE officers have no authority over American citizens. The ICE officer had no legal authority to reach inside her car causing the driver to panic.
Another interesting fact to consider: DHS has created recruiting ads for future ICE officers, one of the things that could help you get hired is being violence prone and a fan of “UFC” fighting or cage fighting. ICE is not recruiting for mature agents that de escalate situations, they are recruiting for agents that love violence and hate immigrants. So DHS top management may bear some culpability for intentionally hiring the wrong types of agents. No police department would want to hire these types of agents.
Do you at least have a shovel to handle all that bull you’re giving us? I’m not even going to bother refuting, since you’re a paid agitaprop for them. Come back to us when you miss your first Somali wire transfer, and then we’ll talk about your feelings.
Really sorry the lady is dead. It looks so far like a legal shoot, even if it was really not a good one, from the audience’s perspective.
Democrat politicians like this are scum, they always politicize things as soon as they can, no restraint, and the media abets them.
At the same time, nobody should gloat over this thing, it is not believable the woman intended to run him over, even if it is understandable why he took the shot. it is still regrettable.
Law enforcement is increasingly militarized and we should reverse that trend.
Sal Sar
Today the video of Good actually hitting the officer has been released.
“Draw your own conclusions about this video taken by one of the ICE officers involved in the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis on Wednesday. It was published by Minnesota’s Alpha News on Friday.
It’s still not 100% clear what happened, but the sound of three gunshots is obscured by the sound of the ICE officer being hit by the car and/or falling over to get out of its way.
Good and her wife were taunting and filming the ICE agents, and when Renee is told to get out of the car, she accelerates toward the camera.”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2026/01/09/new_video_shows_minneapolis_shooting_from_perspective_of_ice_officer.html
JohnSay: I am interested in your opinion on the video posted by others (from Alpha, I had seen it but Upstate posted it? which is being shot from the passenger side of the vehicle. It shows Good’s “wife” starting to open the passenger door, but the car moves forward.
While it’s hard to believe that Good didn’t know or see her “wife” there, it adds a third perspective.
The two most popular views are:
(1) Good intentionally tried to hit ICE
(2) Good was just trying to flee
(or 3) But watching that other video, a third “combo” intent is maybe possible, i.e., was she trying to scare off or deter ICE to back off and away from the car, while her wife got in?
It is hard to conclude that Good was not cognizant of her wife trying to get in the car. And why would she suddenly flee when her wife was trying to get in?
(I’m pretty comfortable with gays/ but my mouth feels like I swallowed a lemon slice when I have to say “wife.)
I dunno. what do you think?
this one:
https://x.com/AlphaNews/status/2009679932289626385
Dare to be wrong. Watch the following analysis and new video –
https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2026/01/09/this-may-be-the-best-analysis-of-the-ice-shooting-video-yet-n4948085
you apparently did not read my comment below @4:48 –you posted yours @ 5:39^
also, I might add that from the video perspective of the rear on the driver’s side, I was initially ambivalent as to whether the vehicle had made contact with Officer’s body, when you carefully look at it in slow motion, you can detect an unequivocal change in gait–just shy of an initial limp, as though the officer’s leg had made contact. His first two steps/gait is a bit telling, then he reverts to normal gait, n’est ce pas?
should read, “but when you look carefully
sorry, I’m done now!
For those who think the officer should not have shot Good. What is the magical outcome to any other scenario ?
From the time the Officer ordered Good to get out of the car to the time her car lunged forward as the Officer rushed to get out of its way Good went from likely being convicted of several counts of a felony that probably would not have resulted in a custodial sentence, to multiple counts of offenses that would have resulted in atleast a decade in jail. That is on her.
Assuming she managed to get onto Portland St. to be able to continue her efforts to escape – what comes next ?
Is she NOW going to pull over and surrender ? She is not going to peacefully drive home – ICE and possibly other officers are going to chase her – because the police do not allow violent felons to just drive arround. Police chases usually end badly – with proprty damage and people injured or killed.
But lets say ICE does not chase her – then the next step is a SWAT raid on her home. And these often end badly, and certainly will traumatize her spouse and children.
Let be clear – from the moment Good decided not to get out of the car as ordered and decided to try to escape on an icy street with people all arround her car – she had recklessly endangered others and likely committed multiple agrevated assaults and she was now a violent felon.
This was not going to end well NO MATTER WHAT.
And the responsibility for that was with Good.
Do not interfere with the police doing their job.
And when the police tell you to do something – DO IT.
The time to argue about the reasonableness of their orders is later with lawyers.
WE do not have public debates over immigration law in the middle of icy streets.
(This (mine, here) is a boring legal comment. Feel free to bypass it.)
We are reminded that in Graham v. Connor (490 U.S. 386), SCOTUS stated: ““The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight,” -objectively taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances that would inform a reasonable officer’s belief in his use of force.
In 2023, liberal Stanford Law School presented a Model Use of Force Policy, developed from input received from multiple municipal police forces, including the Minneapolis Police Department Policy and Procedure Manual (Minneapolis, MN)
Skip down to pg. 29, “PART 4: COMPARISON MEMO SUMMARY” and read the following excerpted passages:
“AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF FORCE
• Some policies have overly permissive authorization clauses. Examples include Lexipol,
IACP, Minnesota, New York, and California”
“AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE
• Many policies do not require absolute necessity and/or exhaustion of all available non-deadly
options. Examples include policies from Lexipol, IACP, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and
California”
“STANDARD IN USING FORCE
• Many policies are rooted in the overly permissive “reasonableness” language of Graham v.
Connor. Examples include policies from Lexipol, IACP, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and
California”
https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Model-Use-of-Force-Policy_Chapter-1_Authorization-and-Standard.pdf
Tim Walz and Jacob Frey want Minneapolis to handle any charges. I say, have at it….
p.s. I add to the above (because this is a federal matter) that pp.58-60 of the 2021 CPB handbook discuss the “reasonableness” standard/principle, and parallels what is said above^^^
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021-Jul/cbp-use-of-force-admin-guide-procedure-handbook_4500-002B.pdf
(affirmed by Mayorkas in 2023)
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-02/23_0206_s1_use-of-force-policy-update.pdf
After tthe Floyd riots and the kangaroo court convictions of Chauvin and his fellow officers – no one Trusts MN.
Notice to federal employees and contractors:
If you are violating federal laws like Title 18 US Code 241, 242 or 245 – the “statute of limitations” will extend beyond 2028.
In other words if we have an honest federal Attorney General that enforces federal laws, federal officials can still be criminally prosecuted or face civil financial lawsuits.
Since violating federal laws are not official duties. In 2028, you could be personally sued or imprisoned (if convicted) and unlikely to ever receive a presidential pardon for your law breaking.
Also when the federal government turns over their investigation findings to state government investigators, you could be criminally indicted by state governments and there will be no presidential pardon.
Maybe think twice about following illegal orders that violate federal laws and violate your Oath of Office! You might spend your retirement years in federal prison. At minimum you will lose your retirement pension.
ATS
Absolutely federal employees should follow the law and constitution – and not obey illegal orders.
Trump has been firing people who did that under Biden and Obama.
Some of them clearly should be civilly sued – something anyone and either party can do NOW, Which unfortunately we are seeing very little of.
All that said – it is pretty trivial to find unconstitutional and illegal actions under Obama and Biden.
Anyone following Autopen EO’s that there is no evidence that Biden was even aware of was acting without any lawful or constitutional power.
All of those involved in the efforts to Censor Free speech – were violating the law and constitution.
All those involved in election fraud were violating the law and constitution.
We have myriads of examples of the Biden and Obama administration violating the 14th amendment and Civil Rights act by Pushing DEI and similar racist policies.
Can you name a SINGLE unconstitutional or Lawless action under Trump ?
We are in the midst of a jihad from the left – that is getting people killed over trying to force ICE to NOT follow the law and constitution.
Governor Walz and Mayor Frey are demanding that the shooting investigation be handled by state authorities.
I think they want to stage manage another Floyd type judicial lynching of a law enforcement officer.
Of course they do.
“Andrew F. Branca, the renowned expert in self-defense law, teaches you how to make quick, effective, legally appropriate decisions in life-and-death situations. His easy-to-understand analysis thoroughly covers the laws of all fifty states.”
https://lawofselfdefense.com/
Branca who is an ACTUAL expert on the law of self defense from LONG BEFORE the recent shooting has noted that the Good shooting was Trivially justified.
There should always be an investigation – but absent some unforeseeable change in the evidence all we have from the left right now is the same lawless and idiotic claims that we always get – The law is whatever we say it is and people we do not like have Always violated the law and constitution and those we like have ALWAYS not violated it.
Probably true; a comment I saw today:
If Good had been savagely tortured and murdered by an illegal alien the story would already be dead in the corporate media.
I am truly shocked by this article! I had very much relied on Prof. Turley’s opinions (and respected his judgment!) during the TDS-days. His criticisms of the liberal left were eye-openers for me; I considered them objective and never partisan. I felt certain that Prof. Turley had very high professional, ethical and moral standards and that he would be similarly critical of any overreaches by the MAGA crowd should the MAGA crowd every attain power.
The MAGA crowd attained power a year ago and Prof. Turley has shown on frequent occasions during this year that his alleged high professional, ethical and moral standards are fake for the most part. He seemingly blindly defends every overreach by the MAGA crowd and never presents the other side. “Audiatur et altera pars” is obviously not important to Prof. Turley.
President Trump posted that the woman “violently, willfully and viciously ran over the ICE officer. It is hard to believe that he is alive”. Did Prof. Turley comment that Trump’s statement is not supported but, instead, contradicted by the videos? No, he did not. On the contrary, Prof. Turley claimed that the woman sped towards the officer and because of that the car had become a weapon and the officer was justified to act in self-defense. Did Prof. Turley not see in the video that the officer stood to the left of the car and the car’s wheels were turned to the right? That the officer had drawn his gun before the woman set the car in forward motion? It seems impossible that Prof. Turley could not have seen that in the video so that one can only conclude that Prof. Turley willfully distorted the facts.
Was it really “hard to believe that the officer was alive” when videos showed him walking away from the crashed car and seemingly giving orders? Was he really treated in the hospital when he looked so healthy? Did Prof. Turley point out these inconsistencies? No, he did not!
Home Secretary Noem said the woman had committed an act of “domestic terrorism,” first disobeying officers’ commands and then weaponizing her SUV by attempting to “run a law enforcement officer over.” Did Prof. Turley point out that this description is not supported but, instead, contradicted by the videos? No, he did not. Instead, he seemed to share the Secretary’s interpretation.
VP Vance justified the officer’s reaction, explaining that only months earlier that officer had been involved in a similar confrontation, was hurt and required several stitches. Did Prof. Turley point out that an officer who is still under some sort of traumatic shock should not be allowed to participate in potentially confrontational actions? No, he did not!
During the last year, did Prof. Turley ever comment that Trump’s conduct on the international scene (threats, blackmail) was not conducive to the reputation of the US and that offending allies while praising foes is likely to damage America’s soft power in the future? Did Prof. Turley ever comment on Trump’s inconsistency by pardoning one drug trafficker while kidnapping another? Did Prof. Turley ever comment that threatening and blackmailing a neighboring country “for the oil; I love oil!”, while not necessarily unlawful or unconstitutional, is nevertheless more akin to Mafia conduct than to the conduct of the Leader of the Free World? No, he did not!
I conclude that Prof. Turley is as much fake as all those liberal leftists whom he has – justifiably – criticized so much in the past!
Okay Klaus George….Svelaz X
Just because you are an idiot doesn’t make the rest of us idiots.
Your narrative just fell apart, https://t.co/p2wks0zew0
KK
President Trump’s remarks do not dictate the lawfulness of this shooting in anyway.
Regardless Goods actions were violent and willful – whether they were vicisious or not requires mind reading.
Recklessly directing a 5000lb SUV in the middle of a bunch of people is violent.
Trying to escape LEOs that have ordered you to “Get the F#$K out of the car” is willful.
While the injuries to the officers involved appear to be minor – reckless conduct can easily lead to far worse consequences.
Contra those on the left here – the Officer moved to avoid Good and was still clipped by her. With slightly less movement on his part he could have been under her tires. Good clearly acted with reckless disregard for human life.
Her efforts to escape Law enforcement were illegal – but even if you idiotically think they were somehow justified – you are not allowed to risk harm to others even in a justified effort to escape.
Regardless – why is Truely or anyone else required to defend or attack Trump’s statements ?
What is at issue is The actions of Good and the officers – to the extent that the remarks of politicians are relevant, it is only whether they encourage further lawlessness and/or predjudice any investigation.
Regardless if you think Trump’s remarks are contradicted by the video you are blind.
Prior to Good being ordered out of the car – she was near certain to be charged with and likely convicted of multiple counts of felony obstruction of Federal law enforcement officers. Numerous people interviewed by the media on the scene reported supportively that Good had repeatedly used her vehicle to block Federal Law Enforcement – there is evidence she had been doing that all day, that she had followed these officers to multiple locations obstructing them repeatedly.
Presuming that she had no prior convictions and no other pending charges – she would not likely have been incarcerated for a first offense.
THAT was the state of things when Good disobeyed the lawful order to get out of her car.
She had good reason to fear that she was going to be arrested and convicted.
If you beleive the facts I layed out are wrong – then her only legitimate fear was of being arrested. If you believe she had not obstructed ICE – then she would not be convicted.
When she refused to leave the car – she added failure to obey a lawful order of law enforcement and resisting arrest to the charges.
When she stated the car and reversed she added fleeing and several counts of reckless endangerment and possibly even aggravated assault of those behind and beside her vehicle. A Zealous US attorney could probably add attempted murder. When she thre the car into Drive she added more counts of reckless endangerment and agrevated assault.
Most of those of you on the left positively drooled over the over prosecutions of J6 defendants. But you appear not to have paid any attention to the law. Any unwanted intentional contact with an LEO while performing their duties is aggravated assault.
I do not agree with those changes to the law – making mere contact with an LEO the same as stabbing an ordinary citizen but that is our law – and it applies to those on the left and the right. One J6 defendant was convicted of Agrevated assault merely for putting his had on top of a CP officer when the CP officers had was on a baricade.
If you do not like how easy it is to charge and convict people of agrevated assault of LEO’s then join me in trying to change the law.
Regardless we have ONE LAW – for those on the right and the left. If you make intentional contact with an LEO while they are doing their job – that is agrevated asault.
So before Good was shot she had now racked up a long list of crimes that were likely to put her in jail for a decade or more.
She went from a likely non-custodial felony conviction when she was ordered out of the car to more than a decade in custody.
Do I personally think her actions warranted that great a change in charges and punishment – absolutely not.
Not for her – and again not for J6 defendants either.
But again THAT IS THE LAW.
Further I have no sympathy for those who whine about the possibiltiy of a lesbian leftist mother spending decades in prison from those who were gleeful about doing the same to conservative grandmothers and fathers.
You can join me in a non-partisan effort to reduce the escalation of minor crimes involving LEOs to near capital offenses,
or you can whine alone when it is those of your ideology that are punished by them,
But lets go further. LEts presume that the Officer did not fire. Lets Presume Good managed to get her car headed down Portland St.
With certainty ICE was going to pursue. Who knows if MN police would have joined that pursuit.
Regardless, while we can not know precisely what would have occured after – Good had already demonstrated that she was prepared to act recklessly to avoid inevitable arrest. What followed would with certainty been a high speed chase involving Good and at the very least ICE though the icy streets of Mineapolis. That would have added a long long list of charges of reckless endangerment as well as far more serious charges if she or the police hit anyone during the pursiut. Generally harm to the police or harm caused by the police in pursuit of a fleeing felon is additional charges against the person fleeing.
Had good successfully pulled onto Portland St. and STOPPED and turned her self over to ICE – she would be facing a decade of imprisonment.
Had she continued fleeing – she would have been jailed for the rest of her life.
You idiotically seem to beleive that Good posed no threat to the Officers – but from the moment she decided to flee – she was a threat – not just to them but to anyone along her path. High speed chases pretty close to never end well. They pretty much always involve injuries, sometimes deaths and significant property damage.
But lets say ICE does not chase – though that is unlikely – LEOs do not just allow people who recklessly endangered others to continue on their merry way.
Then the next step is a SWAT team dispatched to her home. That places her, her souse, her children her neighbors all at risk.
Further the psychological damage to her family if she is hauled away in a SWAT raid will be far greater than had she gotten out of the car when ordered to.
Funny how Renee Good, who turned lesbian after killing her husband, tried to run over a male who shot her dead.
Some lesbians just can’t take handle being gunned down by an alpha male. So her wife wept. Her 3 children will forever regret her mother was a dyke who could not embrace being a mother first and foremost. No, she just had to try and be a big man on the street.
one less emotional cripple on the streets. Now MN needs the mayor of Minneapolis and Governor Tim Walz to put on their big boy pants and act like men. They are pathetic zeta males
Only info I could find on her husband was his death at 36, a 14 year military veteran, in 2023. No cause of death listed. So odds are it was suicide or “sudden death” because of covid vaxx.
https://www.threads.com/@jim.coffey99/post/DTTIsMukdrW
jim.coffey99
1h
What does Military law enforcement have to do w the father who suffered from PtSD. There are so many support groups that provide help and are very successful. He probably found out his wife was cheating w her wife and pushed him over the edge. What’s strange is she’s not even mentioned in the Obituary. She was not a good person. She’s in hell where she belongs.
There’s an interesting 10th Amendment question here.
A Minnesota citizen was killed on a Minnesota street, so shouldn’t the Minnesota or Minneapolis officials have lead jurisdiction in any investigation?
The proper interpretation of 10th Amendment law is that any interpretation can’t violate the 9th Amendment nor violate any other constitutional rights.
For example: racist Jim Crow laws were unconstitutional because the 10th Amendment was interpreted to violate other constitutional rights and freedoms. Marijuana legalization is a legal example where the 10th Amendment doesn’t violate any other rights in the process.
In this case, the jurisdiction is not on the Rio Grand River (ICE jurisdiction) but several miles away from any international borders. Seems like Minnesota investigators have the lead jurisdiction here, not Trump’s FBI.
TL;DR but considering the author of the copy/pasta above, this seems like a good spot to post the following
…..
Andy Ngo
@MrAndyNgo
A Wisconsin man has admitted to killing his parents to steal their money to fund a plot to assassinate President Trump. Nikita Casal pleaded guilty to intentional homicide in Waukesha County on Jan. 8. Charges of two counts of hiding a corpse, two for theft of movable property, two for identity theft, one for taking a vehicle without consent and one for intimidating a witness with threat of force — were dismissed as part of the plea deal.
For years, leftists and some Democrats have been encouraging people to kill Trump to “protect democracy” and “stop hate.” It has led to deadly shootings of his supporter
https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009358190685651039
That is very simple – take the Sussman case – eliminate the use of evidence by saying the process of disclosing to his SECOND defense counsel team (when it had be given to his FIRST defense counsel team). If an equivalent “judge” rules the “investigators” collected evidence in a manner that can be cited as inadmissible (and even fruit of the poisonous tree), it can be disallowed in the case (and any future or related crimes) — U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper is a classic example.
So, if the “Minnesota Investigators” choose to bias the case to “accidentally” mishandle or does not document appropriately chain of evidence – or as we saw in the NYC Bragg case, use a circular investigative system that exceeds statute of limitation requirements, the defense of the ICE officer could be denied by not allowing any “evidence” that Good actually DID assault the officers or acted in a manner. The Police department and/or the biased DA group would just say “oops” and execute the ICE agent.
Example: the Supreme Court, in cases such as Graham v. Connor, has said that courts must consider “the facts and circumstances of each particular case,” it has emphasized that lethal force must be used only against someone who is “an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and … is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” Particularly with armed assailants, the standard governing “imminent harm” recognizes that these decisions must often be made in the most chaotic and brief encounters.
Example of the Bragg usage: https://www.foxnews.com/us/da-braggs-office-drops-case-against-woman-who-allegedly-sucker-punched-pro-life-activist
I can make no sense of your argument.
Why do the Feds have jurisdiction – the Constitutions supremacy clause.
This is not for the most part a 10th amendment issue.
As a rule when there is an alleged crime that violates both federal and state law, there are 3 choices.
The states prosecute
The Feds prosecute.
The states prosecute and then the feds prosecute.
The latter occured in the Rodney king case and the Floyd case.
If the feds prosecute first – double jeophardy in most states precludes the state from prosecuting later.
That is why the state nearly always goes first.
The federal courts has magically ruled that double jeophardy does not apply when the state prosecutes something and then the Feds prosecute.
But every state I am aware of has ruled the opposite if the Feds prosecute first.
Regardless the only way you can get arround federal Supremecy is by convincing federal courts that the federal charges are outside of the powers of the federal government – and that is near impossile
Most of your argument really should rest on the 14th amendment – but that has no application to federal supremecy.
With specific respect to Marijauna – The posession of MJ is STILL a federal crime. Even in a state where it is legal – you can be arrested and prosecuted.
Trump has by EO reclassified Marijauna – which makes it far far less likely that you will be prosecuted and makes the offense much smaller.
But that can be reversed by the next president.
I recall a recent report that someone urged the useful idiots to be prepared to give their own blood for the sake of the cause. Ms Good, unfortunately found herself leading the way. Others will follow. The left is leading an assault on law and order so that they may replace it with authoritarian rule. They don’t care a whit for those they put in harms way or those they want to shield from law enforcement. Everyone is expendable for their “greater good”.
WOW Joe at one time supported the law.
___________________________
. In 2007 Biden was asked if he would allow sanctuary cities to exist. His answer was NO. He said that sanctuary cities turn into dumps and the only reason they exist is because the Federal government doesn’t enforce the law.
2020 Biden – Illegals make cities safer and the economy better, and ICE will be instructed to stop arresting illegals, no more deportations.
Actual front page CNN title:
“Mother of 3 who loved to sing and write poetry shot and killed by ICE in Minneapolis”
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/08/us/renee-nicole-good-minneapolis-ice-shooting-hnk
Theme across all MSM.
She died doing what she loved to do (assaulting police).
WHO IS RENEE NICOLE GOOD? “She/Her” Recently Moved Back From Canada Where She Was Trying To Escape Trump—She Was “Trained against these ICE agents” and Won Prize For Grotesque Poem “On Learning To Dissect Fetal Pigs”
Now, Renee Nicole Good’s wife is reportedly blaming herself for bringing Nicole to the protest with her. There are many unanswered questions about Good’s wife, like why wasn’t she in the vehicle with her wife while she was reportedly blocking the road with her SUV so ICE couldn’t get through?
Her partner should be looked into, domestic abuse and financial situation. Maybe she wanted her dead and tried to facilitate it to cash in on the funding of criminals by Go Fund Me and like organizations. Early yesterday she had already raise 600K.
Nope–Jonathan Ross is the one who “should be looked into”. HE is the killer, it is HIS actions that those that are questionable, and all reasonable inferences point to his using poor judgment and failure to comply with standard police training. As to his prior injury, WHY does he have the habit of reaching into moving motor vehicles? Is he low-functioning, or just so high on testosterone that he lacks common sense? WHY was he allowed back on the streets if he allegedly had PTSD? WHAT was his training in regard to motor vehicles in which the occupant does not comply with an order to stop? In this case, the commands to her were inconsistent–first, she was told to move her vehicle, and then she was told to get out by someone coming from a pick up truck that did not bear any insignia, and Ross did NOT identify himself as a police officer. Police experts I’ve seen interviewed all say that if a driver does not turn off their vehicle and disembark, you should just allow a vehicle to escape and then radio ahead to have them stopped. If they’re not shooting at you, you cannot shoot at them. They had her plate number and her address. They said that you should never stand in front of a moving vehicle, but the officer in front had already moved out of the way. Ross shot her through the driver’s side window–which proves he was NOT in any danger–a fact reinforced by his obvious lack of any sign of injuries as he went up to her vehicle to bask in the glory of her mangled, bloody face. And then, there’s the refusal to allow a physician to attend her and the lie about having “medics” on scene–they did not. AND, the experts say you should never just start shooting at an unarmed suspect in a residential area. There could have been a small child in the back of her vehicle, and there were too many bystanders.
WHY would Ross shoot an unarmed woman, who had been commanded first to move her vehicle, who was waving approaching vehicles to pass, allowed one to pass, and despite the fact that she turned her wheels to the right to move her vehicle away from the officers, got shot repeatedly? The claim that she was trying to deliberately “ram” ICE officers is a blatant lie. She was steering away from them AND she HAD been told to move her vehicle. And, ICE Barbie lied about the ICE vehicles being stuck on snow and ice. And, WHY is the FBI trying to take over the “investigation”, when Trump and ICE Barbie have already dictated the outcome? Do they think anyone will believe them when they “conclude” that Ross was “justified”? Does anyone, even you MAGAs believe that anyone will contradict King Donald, ICE Barbie and James David Vance? This is why people are taking to the streets.
Renee Good’s family can take some comfort from the fact that the majority of the entire country is outraged over this. Jonathan Ross’s name is mud. He does NOT have a bright future and his exercise of poor judgment will haunt him, even after Trump rigs the outcome of the “investigation” in his favor. They wouldn’t even allow MN law enforcement to interview him and he’s nowhere to be found. BUT, the State of Minnesota can still try him for murder, manslaughter, reckless homicide or other state crimes–crimes for which Trump cannot grant a pardon.
gigi on TDS steroids, pure and simple^^^^^
Your narrative just fell apart, https://t.co/p2wks0zew0
Maryland dad, MN mom. See a trend?
Monotonous propaganda.
Prof. Turley seems unaware that the President, the Vice President, and DHS have all made equally outrageous accusations against the murder victim. The resulting production of public chaos and federal-state conflict appears to be desirable to both sides.
No one was murdered.
Goods death is a tragedy.
A self inflicted one , but still a tragedy.
It is not a reason to celebrate.
No one should be celebrating.
I doubt Trump is or DHS or ICE or MAGA.
What is really disturbing is that those on the left do not appear to have learned anything.
It does not appear anyone on the left is rethinking lawless conduct.
The officer who shot Good will have to live with that for the rest of his life – not because he did something illegal or immoral.
But because he killed someone, and somehow that should have been avoidable.
But it is not. Those on the left have convinced themselves that acting lawlessly for some undefined greater good is somehow noble.
So they will happen again. Next time maybe it will be ICE officers killed, or more deluded mothers who thought that undermining the rule of law was more important than her spouse or children.
To those on the left – go to congress and get the law changed – and if you can not succeed LIVE WITH IT.
You claim to beleive in democracy – well that is democracy.
Recent polls have the majority of Minnesotans supporting ICE
Regardless if the rest of the country is stuck with the idiotic laws you have passed until such time as we can legitimately change them – the same is true for you.
The real story here should be about the groups financing this. Blocking ICE vehicles is not protesting. Whoever organized this, broke the law, and it foreseeably resulted in Good’s death. These crowds seem surprisingly large for the middle of the day. I would like to see DHS spend more time reviewing who was paying Good to be there. What is her source of income? She and her spouse seem to move around the country quite a bit. That takes money. Is she a professional agitator? That would change the narrative of this quite a bit.
Blocking any lawful traffic should be considered at least misdemeanor level criminal, but we don’t want people to die for it.
Sal Sar