ICE Shooting in Minnesota Raises Rare Legal Questions

The incident has created an unusual legal rift between federal and local law-enforcement officials.

A federal immigration agent’s fatal shooting of a woman in Minneapolis has spurred deeply diverging narratives of who is to blame.

People hold signs and chant during a protest the day after the fatal shooting of Minneapolis resident Renee Nicole Good by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent, outside the ICE Field Office in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S., January 8, 2026. REUTERS/Rebecca Noble(REUTERS)

The incident also has created an unusual rift between federal and local law enforcers, raising questions about whether, and how, Minnesota officials might seek to prosecute the agent over a shooting they say was unjustified. And it has renewed questions about Trump’s aggressive deportation agenda and the surge of ICE agents into the streets of American cities.

Here’s what to know about the shooting and potential next steps.

When does the lethal use of force cross legal lines?

To use lethal force, an officer has to have a “reasonable apprehension” of an “imminent threat” of serious bodily harm or death being imposed against the officer or someone else, said Phil Stinson, a Bowling Green State University criminologist who studies police misconduct.

The ICE agent’s actions raised questions about whether the incident was a case of “officer-created jeopardy,” where the law enforcement officer put himself in a position of danger and then felt the need to use force, said Geoffrey Alpert, a University of South Carolina criminal justice professor.

Investigators—or a jury—would look at the totality of the circumstances surrounding the shooting, not just the video, to determine whether the officer was reasonable in his belief that the driver he shot posed an imminent threat.

“We have a lot of video material to look at, but I always caution people that video isn’t everything,” said University of Chicago law professor Sharon Fairley. “They’re also going to look at other pieces of evidence and aspects of the situation that may not be reflected on the video. It’s going to be a tough question to answer.”

Could Minnesota prosecutors file criminal charges against the federal officer?

Law enforcement officers are prosecuted occasionally for excessive use of force, but it is typically local cops being charged by local prosecutors. Legal observers say it would be rare, though not unprecedented, for local and state leaders to look to prosecute a federal officer over the objections of the federal government.

One prominent example came after the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff, when the Justice Department decided not to prosecute an FBI sniper who fatally shot the wife of white separatist Randy Weaver. Idaho prosecutors did charge the sniper, and a federal appeals court allowed the case to proceed, but a newly elected prosecutor in Idaho instead chose to drop the charges.

“States can prosecute federal officials when they violate state criminal laws,” said Bryna Godar, staff attorney at the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

If a state or county prosecutor brings charges, a federal officer could seek to move the case into a federal court, but the matter would still involve an alleged state crime, meaning that any conviction couldn’t be pardoned by the president, Godar said.

What happens when the feds won’t cooperate with state investigators?

Minnesota officials said the Trump administration blocked them from participating in the probe, and a statewide criminal investigative office announced it was withdrawing after the Federal Bureau of Investigation shut them out. But other local officials signaled that state-level efforts would continue.

“We are speaking to our local partners on paths forward that will allow us to review the investigation and be transparent in our decision-making,” said Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty.

Without cooperation from federal agencies, it will be close to impossible for state officials to put together a case, said Emmanuel Mauleón, a law professor at the University of Minnesota. State prosecutors are now unlikely to have access to any further evidence—body-worn camera footage, if it exists, interviews with the officer and witnesses, medical reports—and any other investigative material that could be part of a case, Mauleón said.

One key moment in the investigation has already passed: securing the death scene. If federal officials didn’t preserve it, that could complicate any efforts by state officials to bring charges or secure a conviction, legal observers said.

Are officers who use force entitled to legal protections?

Law-enforcement officials enjoy significant legal protections for actions they take during the course of their jobs, but those can be overcome if prosecutors establish that an officer knowingly engaged in egregious conduct that clearly falls outside the law.

Vice President JD Vance on Thursday said the ICE agent responsible for the shooting was doing his job as a federal officer and was protected by “absolute immunity.”

While the term absolute immunity exists in law, it applies to judges and prosecutors, not law enforcement,” said Mauleón, the University of Minnesota law professor.

In general, the law is deferential to police, giving officers significant discretion to use force, making it difficult to hold them criminally or civilly liable. But convictions do happen.

In 2021, a Minnesota jury convicted former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on a second-degree murder charge in connection with the 2020 in-custody death of George Floyd. Chauvin later that year pleaded guilty to federal civil rights charges tied to that case.

What are the normal rules on use of force for federal agents, and were they followed here?

ICE agents like the one involved in Wednesday’s shooting work within the Department of Homeland Security. For its part, the Justice Department cautioned against officers shooting at moving vehicles and encouraged police departments to prohibit it.

The DOJ’s use-of-force policy forbids its own agents and officers from firing at a moving vehicle unless it poses a threat of death or serious injury “and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Write to Louise Radnofsky at louise.radnofsky@wsj.com, Mariah Timms at mariah.timms@wsj.com and C. Ryan Barber at ryan.barber@wsj.com