Minneapolis leaders are investigating the shooting and killing of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good who was shot in the face by an ICE agent on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026 and could prosecute the federal officers under state law.
Jacob Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis, stated, “We collectively are going to do everything possible to get to the bottom of this, to get justice and to make sure that there is an investigation that is conducted in full.” Police Chief Brian O’Hara continued commenting about the state’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension investigation into whether Minnesota state laws had been violated.
States have the ability to “prosecute federal officials for violating state criminal laws,” according to a report published by Slate. Agents with the federal government have immunity in some circumstances but it only applies if their actions are authorized under federal law and are “necessary and proper” to fulfill their federal duties. If they violate federal law or act in an unreasonable manner they can be charged by the state. And states have a long history of following through in court.
States have prosecuted federal officials for using excessive force when carrying out their duties. When federal courts agree the force may not have been legally justified, the court allowed state prosecution to move forward with charges.
For example, in the 1990s, a sniper with the FBI accidentally shot and killed an unarmed woman while carrying out an operation to seize a cabin near Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Attorney General Janet Reno opted to not press charges, but a county prosecutor in Idaho thought different and pursued charges against the agent. The FBI sniper was charged with involuntary manslaughter and the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted Idaho permission to proceed due to there being “material questions of fact” questioning if the sniper’s use of deadly force as reasonable, according to the federal court. If the deadly shooting was not a reasonable response, the agent would not be immune from state prosecution. In this particular case the charges were dropped when the prosecutor who brought the case to court left office.
In 1906 the U.S. Supreme Court approved state prosecution against two federal soldiers who fatally shot a man believed to be stealing federal property, but there were key facts being disputed. The court held the soldiers liable because several witnesses stated the man had surrender and therefore the soldiers’ actions were not reasonable.
During the era of prohibition, multiple states charged federal officers with attempted murder, murder, and other crimes for using lethal force during arrests involving prohibition-related crimes. However, as many times federal courts have agreed with state charges due to misconduct, they have also dismissed state prosecutions based on immunity when it was a reasonable response.
In the Minnesota case, prosecution would play out differently. Most notably, it would likely take place in a federal court and not a state court. According to the federal statute, federal officers can move criminal cases from state court to federal if the defense is rooted in federal law. The desire to claim federal immunity is enough for state crimes to be taken to a federal judge even if the immunity claim fails. It also does not mean federal courts will take over the entire process. The prosecutor would present the case in federal court but the criminal charges would be for state-level crimes. This means, if convicted, the president cannot pardon the officers, as the charges are for state-level crimes.
If Minnesota brings charges against the ICE shooter, pretrial litigation over immunity may be a lengthy process. For Example, the Idaho incident discussed above took place in 1992, buy the 9th Circuit Court did not rule the case to move forward until 2001.
There are complexities concerning procedure and it will take time, however, states have proven their willingness to bring charges against federal agents unreasonably using excessive force in the past and have the right to do it again.
The Fourth Amendment clearly states the prohibition of using force that is “objectively unreasonable” when making an arrest, an investigatory stop, or any other “seizure” of a person.
By Jeanette Vietti
Sources:
Slate: Minnesota Could Prosecute the ICE Shooter. Trump Can’t Pardon Him.
Congress.gov: Excessive Force and the Fourth Amendment: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Legal Test
Department of Justice: 1-16.000 Department of Justice Policy On Use Of Force
Featured Image Courtesy of Scott’s Flickr Page – Creative Commons License
