State and local officials have demanded ICE leave Minneapolis after an officer shot and killed a woman during an immigration operation Wednesday.
But Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said agents aren’t going anywhere and has insisted the woman, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Macklin Good, was committing an “act of domestic terrorism” when she was shot.
Local officials have rejected the Trump administration’s explanation that it was self-defense.
Here is a look at the potential legal repercussions.
The officer fired “defensive shots” after a “violent rioter” attempted to run over officers, a spokeswoman of the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement, adding that the officer had feared for his life.
Online videos of the shooting verified by Reuters cast doubt on the government’s narrative, however.
One video showed an officer approach an SUV and order the driver out and grab at the door handle while another officer appeared in front of the car.
The driver moves forward while turning away from the officers, and the one in front pulls his weapon, steps back and fires three shots.
It was not clear if the car made contact with the officer, and he fired at least one shot after it had already passed him.
Minnesota’s use-of-force law permits state police to use deadly force only if reasonable officers would believe doing so was necessary to protect themselves, or others, from death or serious harm.
Federal law has a similar standard, permitting use of deadly force when a reasonable officer would have probable cause to believe a person posed an immediate threat of death or serious injury.
Federal agents are generally immune from state prosecution for actions taken as part of their official duties. Immunity only applies when an officer’s actions were authorized under federal law and were necessary and proper.
If Minnesota charged the agent, he could seek to move the case to federal court and argue he is immune from prosecution.
To prevail, the state would have to show the actions were outside his official duties or were objectively unreasonable or clearly unlawful.
