By Glenn Kirschner and Dave Aronberg
Policing the people is a solemn responsibility. At its core, it involves protecting and serving the community. The power that comes with the authority to wear a badge on your chest and a gun on your hip is enormous, as is the responsibility that follows. Officers must act with care, using only the force necessary—and no more. They are required to de-escalate whenever safely possible.
Universal principles of law enforcement dictate that officers should not step in front of moving vehicles or shoot at fleeing cars as a means to stop them. Yet, the video of ICE Agent Jonathan Ross shooting Renee Good appears to show a flagrant violation of these protocols. Ross stepped in front of her running vehicle and continued firing even after any potential threat had passed.
The law is clear that deadly force can be used only if there is an imminent risk of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or others. An officer cannot continue firing once the threat is no longer present. Agent Ross undoubtedly will argue that his three shots were fired in quick succession as part of an instinctive response to a moving car that posed an imminent threat to his life. The videos, however, provide the most compelling evidence of the fatal encounter.
When deadly force is used, an institutional responsibility kicks in: the need for a full, fair, and thorough investigation. Renee Good had a Fourth Amendment right to be free from an “unreasonable seizure” resulting from excessive -- and ultimately deadly -- force. Indeed, as the former head of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Kristen Clarke has said, the officer-involved shooting death of Renee Good “is precisely the kind of case that the Civil Rights Division would investigate carefully, fully, and fairly . . . because this is one of the most solemn duties and responsibilities of the Justice Department, investigating officials who potentially violate the law and violate our constitution while acting under color of law.”
It has become clear the federal government intends to conduct no real investigation. Instead, they are blocking Minnesota investigators from accessing critical evidence—the gun, the ballistics, and the car. Secretary Kristi Noem, Vice President J.D. Vance and other Trump administration officials even demonized the victim as a domestic terrorist before any investigation had even commenced, let alone concluded. The federal government cannot allow its officers to kill the citizenry without scrutiny or consequence. This is a hallmark of dictatorships.
Unbowed, Minnesota state officials indicated that they would conduct an independent investigation to determine whether Agent Ross’s actions violated state law. Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarity announced that her office will be working together with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to investigate Good’s death.
When multiple jurisdictions have an interest in conducting an investigation, cooperation among jurisdictions is the norm. As former prosecutors, we both have been involved in multi-jurisdictional investigations in which we have struck cooperative and cordial relationships across jurisdictional lines. Even when the rhetoric is heated, conflicts usually are resolved behind the scenes. For example, Governor DeSantis ordered a state prosecution of attempted Trump assassin Ryan Routh because he distrusted the Biden Administration and its Department of Justice. Yet behind closed doors, Florida’s Statewide Prosecutor met with the Biden DOJ to cooperate on evidence sharing.
What is happening now is unprecedented. Neither of us has ever experienced or even heard of the federal government trying to obstruct a state from investigating possible violations of state laws by a federal officer. The only legitimate reason for one jurisdiction to refuse to share evidence with another is to preserve the integrity of the evidence for use in a prosecution – not to ensure that a suspect forever evades justice.
Here’s what we anticipate will happen next as part of its investigation into the homicide of Renee Good: Minnesota prosecutors may attempt to use grand jury subpoenas, as well as state court search warrants and court orders, in attempts to obtain the evidence that is in the custody of the federal government.
Indeed, when asked if he envisions Minnesota prosecutors using grand jury subpoenas and/or court orders in an effort to compel federal authorities to release the evidence, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said, “I say yes, but . . . it’s going to be a thorny legal issue to sort through . . . will the (state) court have the authority under separation of powers to tell the executive branch to release information? I suspect we'd have a court battle over it, but my position would be that the state will be entitled to it.”
In the event those efforts are unsuccessful in wrestling the evidence away from the feds, Minnesota officials could bring suit pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, arguing that the federal government’s refusal to provide the evidence is “arbitrary and capricious.” That the Trump administration is refusing to even conduct an investigation into the incident may convince a federal judge to order the DOJ to give Minnesota investigators access to the evidence.
With or without the federal government’s cooperation, the state * is *collecting its own evidence. Among other things, state prosecutors could present a grand jury with all the compelling videos, 911 calls, EMS and fire department reports, the many witness statements, and the testimony of the state law enforcement officers and even federal agents who feel ethically obligated to comply with state subpoenas. We believe that the weight of the evidence will convince a Minnesota grand jury to indict Ross for some level of criminal homicide.
In the event of an indictment, Ross’s defense attorney will subsequently "remove" the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) because Ross is a federal officer who will assert that he was acting within the scope of his official duties. Importantly, even as the case gets transferred to federal court, it remains a state prosecution with state prosecutors charging under state law. This means that the case is “pardon proof,” which will insulate the case from President Trump’s involvement.
In federal court, the defense will argue Ross should have immunity from prosecution, but federal immunity only applies if the officer’s actions were “necessary and proper” to fulfill their duties. State prosecutors will argue that firing into a vehicle while recording with a cell phone is neither.
The immunity decision is a monumental one in this case and will surely be appealed by the losing party. But just getting to that stage is somewhat of a victory for the rule of law. Despite the administration’s attempts to short-circuit this case before it ever begins, we cannot allow the federal government to grant its agents a license to kill without scrutiny. That is the hallmark of a dictatorship, not a republic. This blueprint is the only hope for justice -- for Renee Good, her family, and the American people who deserve a government that respects the law.
