Minneapolis ICE shooting: Could the officer face charges? Legal expert weighs in
Minneapolis ICE shooting: Could officer face charges?
If local prosecutors determine ICE officer Jonathan Ross acted wrongly in the shooting of Renee Good, could he face state charges for the shootings? Hamline law professor David Schultz walks us through the legal dynamics at play.
MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - Minnesota prosecutors say they are continuing their investigation of the shooting of Renee Good at the hands of an ICE officer in Minneapolis. But, even if they were to deem the ICE officer committed a crime, it would be difficult to bring a successful case against him.
Sunday morning, FOX 9 spoke with Hamline political science and law professor David Schultz who explained the uphill battle local prosecutors face when charging a federal law enforcement officer.
The backstory:
Last week, the Minnesota BCA said it was being blocked out of the investigation into the shooting of Renee Nicole Good at the hands of ICE officer Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis. Cell phone video shows Good was behind the wheel of a Honda Pilot, apparently attempting to pull away while Ross was in front of the vehicle, when Ross fired shots into the vehicle. The first shots pierced the windshield, but the second and third shots may have been fired through the driver's side window as Good's vehicle passed by Ross.
Conflicting assessments:
Federal officials have already deemed that Ross acted in self-defense in the shooting. The Department of Homeland Security says Good was interfering with ICE officers trying to do their jobs then committed an "act of domestic terrorism" by driving her SUV toward Ross.
However, Minneapolis leaders aren't buying the ICE narrative, saying video evidence shows the contrary: that Ross was trying to drive away from the ICE officer and Ross acted recklessly in firing his weapon.
Could the ICE officer face charges?
What we know:
Last week during a White House press briefing, Vice President J.D. Vance said the ICE officer involved was acting in self-defense. But, even if Minnesota prosecutor attempted to bring a criminal case against Ross, he would be protected by "absolute immunity." But, Vance was likely wrong about absolute immunity, but his premise is correct.
Absolute immunity is a protection that shields government officials from criminal charges and civil action for actions during the course of their duty. However, absolute immunity typically extends only to lawmakers, judges and prosecutors – not law enforcement.
However, officers have another force of protection now as supremacy clause immunity.
Schultz explains: "There are three sort of hurdles that you'd have to go through to actually get to a point where you could hold any ICE agent criminally responsible. The first one is the whole concept of what's called the Supremacy Clause, that makes the Constitution, and all federal laws, the supreme law of the land. And generally, as that's been interpreted, it makes it difficult, not impossible, but difficult for state and local governments to sue – actually in this case – to hold federal agents criminally responsible."
What would prosecutors need to prove?
Dig deeper:
Schultz says to move forward with a case locally, prosecutors would have to prove the federal officer wasn't acting in an official capacity but purely as a private individual.
"Let's say an ICE agent shot somebody in a bar after hours – they were drinking or something – that's probably private," Schultz says. "But here, given the fact that Noem has already said he followed instructions, he was acting as an agent, makes it difficult."
If prosecutors could get past that bar, Schultz says, prosecutors would then still have to prove the use of force was not objectively reasonable – which is a high bar to pass. In any case, if you were able to pass those two hurdles, at the end you would still need to prove a crime occurred.
The other side:
Even if local prosecutors are unable to bring a case, Schultz says Good's family could bring a civil suit against the U.S. government.
It is also possible that the federal government could bring charges against Ross if they ultimately deem he acted wrongly. But that would appear to be unlikely scenario given that the Department of Homeland Security is standing by Ross.