Investigating the Justification of the Minneapolis ICE Shooting

Tue Jan 13 2026 08:43:06 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

As the investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent unfolds, contrasting narratives and video evidence complicate the assessment of whether force was justified.

The shooting of a woman by a federal agent in Minneapolis has raised questions about the justification of deadly force. Video evidence has led to conflicting interpretations from local and federal officials, with claims regarding the nature of the threat posed by the victim. This incident has not only sparked protests but also highlights the challenges investigators face when political commentators have already influenced public perception. A thorough examination of the applicable policies and situational context is necessary to reach a resolution.

US investigators will face a host of thorny questions in determining whether the fatal shooting of a woman by a federal agent in Minneapolis last week was justified, as local and national officials recount drastically different accounts of an incident that sparked nationwide protests.

Several videos have emerged showing US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross firing at and killing Renee Good, 37, while she was behind the wheel of her burgundy Honda in a residential neighbourhood of the northern city.

President Donald Trump and his administration have described Good as a domestic terrorist who was trying to run over the ICE agent, while state officials have said Good, a mother of three, was trying to leave the scene.

Former law enforcement officials told the BBC that a review of the incident could plausibly find the agent was justified in using deadly force because he believed Good was a threat.

But they said Trump officials' strong public statements in support of Ross in the immediate aftermath of the shooting could complicate the investigation.

When you have that much command and influence of everyone saying (the shooting) is already justified before the facts are in... I think that's where you have problems, former FBI special agent Robert D'Amico said.

Local and federal officials have both cited video footage of the incident to support their interpretations of the event.

Multiple angles show ICE agents approaching a car in the middle of the street and asking the driver - Good - to get out. One of the agents then tugs at the driver's side door handle.

As the vehicle begins to move forward, Ross, who was also filming, points and shoots at Good. The car turns away from the officers and crashes on the side of the road.

Local and state officials say the videos demonstrate that Good was not a threat as she was turning away from the agent. Federal officials, meanwhile, say the videos are evidence that Good was trying to drive her car into the officer and that his only choice was to use deadly force.

When analysing whether the ICE officer was justified in shooting Good, investigators will have to compare Ross's actions in the videos to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) policy on the use of deadly force.

Former law enforcement agents said a previous episode in which Ross was injured on duty - as well as the quick determinations he had to make about the threat level - will likely be seen by federal investigators as providing that official justification.

Under DHS policy, agents are authorised to use deadly force if they believe they are at risk of death, imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm.

A specific clause states that officers cannot fire at a moving vehicle unless someone in the car is threatening the officer or unless the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury and no other objectively reasonable means of defence appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.

Gray, a former FBI agent, noted that officials conducting the review will also consider that, just months earlier, Ross was dragged by a car and injured after confronting someone else in a vehicle. The incident could have convinced him that Good was a similar threat.

However, D'Amico warned that while the first shot may be justified, it would be harder to rationalize the subsequent shots fired once the car was already moving away.

If you're on a shooting review board for the DHS and your secretary said it's justified, your president said it's justified, how do you then look at the facts and say 'I don't think it's justified'?

This incident illustrates not just the complexities of assessing the justification for deadly force but also highlights the intersection of law enforcement, politics, and public trust.

}