What began as another tense standoff during an immigration enforcement operation has now turned into a case drawing intense federal scrutiny and political controversy.
A deadly shooting involving an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent and a Minnesota mother has raised hard questions about accountability, activism, and how the federal government defines domestic terrorism.
FBI Takes Over as Criminal Charges Fade
Federal investigators have taken full control of the case, sidelining local police as the FBI leads the probe into the killing of 37-year-old Renee Good.
The focus, according to officials, is on reconstructing the moments that led to the shooting and reviewing the conduct of ICE agent Jonathan Ross, including his use of force and the firearm involved.
Sources familiar with the investigation say Ross is now unlikely to face criminal charges.
The Department of Justice’s civil rights division, which typically steps in for police-related shootings, has reportedly not opened an investigation into whether Good’s constitutional rights were violated.
Shift in Focus Toward Activist Networks
Rather than centering solely on the actions of the agent, the Justice Department is said to be expanding its attention to activists involved in ICE watch activities in a Minneapolis neighborhood.
Investigators reportedly believe some protesters may have played a role in escalating tensions on the day of the shooting.
Whether Renee Good herself had deeper ties to activist groups remains unclear.
Officials acknowledge that, aside from participating in protests against ICE operations on the day she was killed, there is no confirmed evidence yet of her broader involvement.
Still, the FBI appears determined to explore that possibility.
What Witnesses Say Happened on the Ground
People who were present say Good and her wife, Rebecca, were acting as legal observers during the protest, documenting interactions between ICE agents and demonstrators.
Video from the scene captures the emotional aftermath, including a distraught Rebecca blaming herself for encouraging her wife to confront federal agents.
Friends of Good have since said her activism stemmed from her six-year-old son’s charter school, where she became involved with a local ICE Watch group.
That group reportedly aims to disrupt immigration raids by observing and documenting enforcement actions.
Friends Defend Good’s Actions
Those who knew Good describe her as committed and well-prepared.
A fellow parent from her son’s school said she had undergone training on how to engage with ICE agents safely and responsibly.
Supporters insist that Good believed she was doing the right thing and followed the guidance she had been taught.
To them, the footage doesn’t change their view of her character or intentions.
Surveillance Footage and the Moments Before the Shooting
Video evidence shows Good’s SUV stopped in the roadway for several minutes before the shooting.
Shortly after the vehicle pulled up, a passenger believed to be Rebecca exited and began filming, possibly anticipating a confrontation with agents.
Additional footage shows an officer approaching the driver’s side door and grabbing the handle while demanding it be opened.
Moments later, the vehicle began moving forward. Agent Ross then drew his weapon and fired three shots as he jumped back.
Whether the SUV actually struck Ross remains unclear.
After the gunfire, the vehicle veered into two parked cars before coming to a stop.
Federal Officials Quickly Label the Incident
Almost immediately, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem described Good’s actions as “domestic terrorism,” arguing that Ross acted according to his training after believing he was about to be run over.
President Donald Trump echoed that assessment, calling Good a “professional agitator” and claiming the shooting was an act of self-defense.
He later doubled down, describing both Good and her wife as “very violent” and “very radical,” while suggesting authorities would uncover who was backing their activism.
Experts Push Back on the Terrorism Label
Legal experts say those declarations came far too quickly.
Former Justice Department official Thomas E. Brzozowski noted that domestic terrorism classifications typically follow a careful, structured process—one he believes was bypassed in this case.
According to Brzozowski, skipping that process risks turning the term “domestic terrorism” into a political weapon rather than a legal designation based on evidence and standards.
A Broader Redefinition Raises Concerns
Complicating matters further is a recent memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi that significantly broadened the federal definition of domestic terrorism.
The guidance now includes not only violent acts like rioting, but also behaviors such as obstructing law enforcement or doxxing officers.
The memo frames domestic terrorism as violence or threats of violence tied to political or social agendas, listing causes such as opposition to immigration enforcement and anticapitalist movements.
Critics argue this definition disproportionately targets progressive activism.
How the New Definition Affects Investigations
Experts warn that such an expanded definition can shape how investigators approach cases on the ground.
Once those assumptions are embedded in policy, field agents and prosecutors must contend with them, whether or not they fit the facts of a specific incident.
That, critics say, makes objective analysis harder and increases the risk of politicized enforcement.
Minnesota Pushes Back in Court
As the federal investigation continues, Minnesota officials are taking legal action of their own.
The state has filed a lawsuit seeking to block what it describes as an unconstitutional surge of ICE operations, arguing that the crackdown unfairly targets Minnesota compared to other states.
The lawsuit challenges Operation Metro Surge, claiming it violates federal law by allowing arbitrary enforcement.
It also seeks to limit federal agents from threatening force or brandishing weapons against individuals who are not subject to immigration arrest.
Claims of Political Targeting
State officials are also asking the court to bar the arrest of U.S. citizens and visa holders without probable cause.
While the Trump administration says the increased raids are about combating fraud, Minnesota argues ICE agents lack the expertise for that mission.
Instead, the state claims the operation is politically motivated, alleging it punishes Minnesota for its political stance—a move it says violates First Amendment protections.
What Comes Next
With federal investigators narrowing their focus, legal definitions expanding, and a state-level lawsuit underway, the case is far from over.
The shooting of Renee Good has become more than a single use-of-force investigation—it now sits at the intersection of immigration policy, protest rights, and the limits of federal power.
Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn