Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey publicly denounced federal claims labeling Renee Nicole Good a “domestic terrorist” following her fatal shooting by an ICE agent. After reviewing video evidence that directly contradicts the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) narrative, Frey called the self-defense and terrorism story “garbage,” exposing a troubling pattern of federal overreach, violence, and the weaponization of terrorism labels to justify lethal force against American citizens and block state oversight.
Story Highlights
- Minneapolis Mayor Frey rejected federal “domestic terrorism” claims after reviewing shooting video.
- ICE agent Jonathan Ross killed 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good during immigration operation.
- Federal agencies blocked Minnesota state investigators from participating in probe.
- Video evidence contradicts DHS narrative that Good attempted to run over officers.
Mayor Exposes Federal Narrative as False Propaganda
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey delivered a scathing rebuke of federal authorities after reviewing video footage of the ICE shooting that killed Renee Nicole Good. Frey called the self-defense and terrorism narrative “garbage” and declared that “anybody can see” Good was not a domestic terrorist. The mayor’s blunt assessment directly contradicted Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s characterization of Good’s actions as “a domestic act of terrorism,” exposing how federal agencies weaponize terrorism language to justify questionable use of force.
“If you got nothing to hide from, then don’t hide from it”: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey calls for the FBI to conduct a fair investigation following Wednesday's ICE-involved shooting death of a woman in Minnesota.
MORE: https://t.co/DpGH8wageI pic.twitter.com/eRndAvSHXx
— NewsNation (@NewsNation) January 9, 2026
Pattern of Federal Overreach and Violence
The Good shooting represents the latest example of escalating federal immigration enforcement tactics that prioritize aggressive confrontation over measured law enforcement. Federal officers had fatally shot at least three other people in the five months before Good’s death, consistently claiming drivers attempted to strike officers with vehicles. In multiple cases, including those of Silverio Villegas González and Marimar Martinez, body-camera footage later contradicted initial federal claims, revealing a troubling pattern of misleading narratives used to justify lethal force against American citizens.
The National Lawyers Guild correctly identified the dangerous precedent of labeling civil disobedience and documentation activities as “domestic terrorism.” This rhetorical escalation represents government overreach designed to intimidate citizens from exercising their constitutional rights to observe and document federal law enforcement activities. When federal agencies can arbitrarily apply terrorism labels to justify deadly force, constitutional protections become meaningless, and citizens lose fundamental safeguards against government abuse.
Federal Control Blocks Transparency and Accountability
Federal authorities deliberately excluded Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension from investigating the shooting, placing the FBI in sole control of evidence and findings. This unprecedented federal preemption of state oversight eliminates independent scrutiny of ICE actions and concentrates power in agencies with institutional interests in defending the shooting. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz recognized this manipulation, warning citizens not to believe what he called a “propaganda machine” after reviewing the same video evidence that contradicted federal claims.
The timing and location of this shooting—less than one mile from where George Floyd was killed—demonstrates federal agencies’ callous disregard for community trauma and local sovereignty. ICE conducted this operation knowing it would inflame tensions in a community still recovering from previous law enforcement controversies, suggesting either incompetence or deliberate provocation designed to assert federal dominance over local preferences.
Constitutional Rights Under Attack Through Terrorism Labels
The federal government’s decision to characterize Good’s actions as “domestic terrorism” represents a dangerous expansion of counterterrorism language into routine law enforcement situations. This labeling strategy allows federal agencies to justify militarized responses against citizens engaging in constitutionally protected activities like documentation and observation. When immigration enforcement adopts terrorism rhetoric, it signals a fundamental shift toward treating American citizens as enemy combatants rather than individuals with constitutional rights deserving due process and proportionate responses.
Americans must recognize this case as symptomatic of broader federal overreach that threatens individual liberty and local governance. The willingness of DHS and ICE to fabricate terrorism narratives while blocking independent oversight demonstrates contempt for constitutional constraints on government power. Citizens supporting law and order must distinguish between legitimate enforcement and abuse of authority that undermines the very legal framework these agencies claim to protect.
Watch the report: ‘Don’t hide’: Minneapolis mayor demands fair probe into ICE shooting amid FBI takeover
Sources:
- Minneapolis mayor demands transparent probe into ICE shooting
- Minneapolis mayor: DHS claim of domestic terrorism after woman’s death is ‘positively ridiculous’
- Jacob Frey tells critics ‘sorry I offended their delicate ears’ after ICE f-bomb controversy
