This
morning,
ICE
agents
shot
and
killed
a
woman
in
Minneapolis.
The
agents,
part
of
a
Minnesota
surge
designed
by
the
administration
to
harass
the
local
Somali
immigrant
population
and,
by
extension,
keep
media
focus
on
a
day
care
scandal
that
conservatives
recently
“uncovered”
even
though
the
mainstream
media
had
covered
the
case
for
over
a
year.
This
political
theater
has
now
cost
a
woman
her
life
and,
because
“being
law
enforcement
means
legally
never
having
to
say
you’re
sorry,”
there
will
likely
be
no
consequences
for
this.
Masked
ICE
officers
approach
a
Honda
Pilot
stopped
on
Portland
Avenue.
The
driver
was
a
37-year-old
U.S.
citizen
working
as
a
legal
observer.
She
was
not
the
target
of
any
law
enforcement
investigation
or
activity,
according
to
Minneapolis
Police
Chief
Brian
O’Hara.
Video
of
the
incident
shows
one
officer
tell
the
driver
to
“get
out
of
the
f*cking
car”
and
trying
to
open
the
door.
Another
seems
to
be
ordering
her
to
leave.
The
driver
then
backs
up
and
as
she
drives
away
from
the
officers,
an
officer
fires
three
shots.
The
woman
slumped
over
in
her
seat
and
was
later
pronounced
dead
at
Hennepin
Healthcare.
DHS
spokesperson
Tricia
McLaughlin
said
the
woman
“weaponized
her
vehicle,
attempting
to
run
over
our
law
enforcement
officers
in
an
attempt
to
kill
them.”
Homeland
Security
Secretary
and
dog
murderer
Kristi
Noem
called
it
“an
act
of
domestic
terrorism,”
a
wild
claim
to
make
about
a
slowly
departing
SUV
on
the
day
after…
JANUARY
6.
The
Party
told
you
to
reject
the
evidence
of
your
eyes
and
ears.
It
was
their
final,
most
essential
command.
Mayor
Jacob
Frey,
who
had
actually
watched
the
video,
described
the
DHS
press
spin
succinctly.
“That
is
bullshit.”
He’s
right,
not
that
it
will
end
up
mattering.
It
was
also
the
inevitable
result
of
a
government
lowering
its
standards
to
the
bottom
of
the
ocean
to
arm
any
aspiring
Dirty
Harry
with
a
pulse
and
a
burning
desire
to
harass
and
beat
anyone
based
on
race.
They
don’t
even
have
to
pretend
it’s
not
just
about
race
thanks
to
Brett
Kavanaugh!
We’ve
been
treated
to
video
of
ICE
agents
fumbling
their
guns
and
waving
them
at
innocent
bystanders
and
running
over
people
with
their
cars.
The
agency
has
struggled
so
badly
to
meet
Trump’s
hiring
goals
that
it
eliminated
age
requirements
entirely
(18-year-olds
welcome!).
Reports
indicate
that
one-third
of
recruits
at
the
Federal
Law
Enforcement
Training
Center
failed
a
modest
physical
fitness
test.
Half
failed
an
open-book,
open-notes
test
on
immigration
and
constitutional
law.
Who
fails
an
open-book,
open-notes
exam?
The
administration
will
make
sure
the
man
who
killed
this
woman
in
cold-blood
this
morning
won’t
face
criminal
prosecution.
Hennepin
County
Attorney
Mary
Moriarty
says
she’s
pushing
for
a
local
investigation.
The
FBI
and
Minnesota
Bureau
of
Criminal
Apprehension
are
supposedly
looking
into
it.
But
federal
agents
enjoy
broad
protections
from
state
prosecution,
and
this
Justice
Department
under
this
administration
isn’t
exactly
eager
to
hold
ICE
accountable
for
anything.
For
what
it’s
worth,
Trump’s
post
includes
a
video
clip
of
the
shooting
where
the
ICE
agent
who
is
“hard
to
believe
he
is
alive”
got
up
next
to
her
car
after
backing
up
and
beginning
to
go
the
other
way.
It’s
in
super-duper
slow
mo
in
order
to
obscure
the
fact
that
the
car
was
inching
forward
when
the
agent
was
so
grievously…
near
it.
Yeah,
Trump’s
going
to
give
the
guy
a
medal
at
his
pardoning
ceremony.
Probably
the
Purple
Bone
Spur
or
something.
But
even
a
civil
effort
to
discourage
dangerous
—
and
in
this
case,
deadly
—
incompetence
or
abuse
must
deal
with
qualified
immunity,
the
court-invented
doctrine
shielding
government
officials
from
the
law
unless
they
violate
“clearly
established”
constitutional
rights.
And
if
you’re
wondering
what
qualifies
as
“clearly
established,”
the
answer
is:
basically
nothing!
Because
the
courts
have
come
to
a
dangerously
dystopian
consensus
that
the
law
does
not
“clearly
establish”
rights
if
the
exact
scenario
of
police
misconduct
has
never
been
ruled
on
before…
which
means
they
can’t
rule
on
it
now!
It’s
a
situation
that
Kafka
would
dismiss
as
too
over-the-top.
Courts
have
held
that
qualified
immunity
protects
officers
who
arrested
someone
over
satirical
Facebook
posts.
It
protects
officers
who
tased
a
man
covered
in
gasoline,
setting
him
on
fire.
It
protects
officers
who
shot
unarmed
10-year-olds
in
their
front
lawn
while
aiming
for
a
“non-threatening”
dog.
All
because
no
one
had
ever
committed
those
precise
abuses
before.
Qualified
immunity
also
asks
whether
a
“reasonable
officer”
would
have
known
their
conduct
was
unlawful.
But
what
counts
as
“reasonable”
for
officers
barely
passing
open
book
con
law
exams?
So
now
you
have
a
rapidly
recruited
and
questionably
vetted
force,
built
off
warlike
recruiting
pitches,
promised
cushy
federal
protections
plus
a
doctrine
that
says,
“Don’t
worry,
you’ll
never
face
civil
liability
unless
someone
somewhere
has
already
litigated
a
situation
just
like
this
one.”
Even
if
the
agents
didn’t
kill
anyone
today,
this
is
a
noxious
combination
that
incentivizes
reckless
action
—
killing
an
innocent
bystander
was
an
inevitability.
Usually,
these
cases
deal
with
state
law
enforcement
avoiding
federal
civil
rights
laws
based
on
qualified
immunity
—
a
doctrine
that
stems
from
a
clerical
error.
As
Cardozo
Law
professor
Alexander
Reinert
uncovered,
the
original
text
of
Section
1983
—
the
civil
rights
statute
at
issue
—
specifically
stated
that
officials
couldn’t
hide
behind
any
state
common
law
protections
for
law
enforcement.
Which
makes
sense
because
what
would
be
the
point
of
a
federal
civil
rights
law,
passed
during
Reconstruction,
if
it
didn’t
supersede
state
law.
But
when
someone
compiled
the
federal
statutes
in
1874,
they
just…
left
that
part
out.
Oops.
Here
we
have
a
federal
law
enforcement
officer
killing
a
woman,
so
it
should
be
an
easier
question:
of
course
the
federal
Congress
who
passed
this
law
did
not
intend
to
render
it
inapplicable
to
the
federal
government.
Yet,
the
Supreme
Court
went
ahead
and
applied
the
whole
rickety
qualified
immunity
doctrine
to
federal
agents.
So
here
we
are
with
a
scriveners
error
creating
a
nonsense
doctrine
to
protect
state
law
enforcement
that’s
now
clumsily
bolted
onto
federal
agents.
Not
that
Bivens
—
the
basis
of
a
citizen’s
recourse
against
federal
actors
—
has
much
juice
left
in
it
anyway,
but
that’s
another
legal
and
moral
failing
of
this
Supreme
Court.
Based
on
what’s
been
happening
with
Bivens,
it’s
arguable
that
victims
have
a
better
chance
holding
a
state
officer
accountable.
Congress
could
get
rid
of
this
protection
for
ICE
agents
—
there
was
a
bill
to
do
just
that
last
year
—
but
Congress
has
its
hands
full
keeping
the
Epstein
files
from
getting
out.
No
one
in
a
position
to
address
this
injustice
will
do
anything
about
it.
Because
“law
and
order”
politicians
like
their
law
enforcement
unfettered
by
accountability.
And
so
officers
keep
shooting
and
courts
keep
shrugging.
Even
while
families
have
to
bury
their
loved
ones
killed
over
this
doctrine.
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.