Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley told her fellow members of the US House Oversight Committee on Wednesday that a motion she was introducing during a hearing was “pretty straightforward”: The committee, she said, should conduct oversight regarding a federal agent’s fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good, a woman in Minneapolis who was killed in her car earlier in the day.

But the motion failed, with every Republican on the panel voting against it.

Pressley (D-Mass.) introduced the motion during a hearing regarding a fraud scandal in the state, hours after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot Good, who was in the driver’s seat of her car as multiple officers approached her. Good was acting as a legal observer, according to Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), monitoring ICE actions following the Trump administration’s surge of federal agents into Minnesota, in part to target members of the Somali community.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    2 days ago

    They’ve got a pretty good DA:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Moriarty

    trump will pardon anything federal, this needs handled on a local level. Not just for this one killing, but to set the standard that federal agents are still subject to state laws and can’t just do whatever the fuck they want in states that don’t want them there…

    We kind of fought an entire civil war already when Lincoln refused to do it for slave raiding parties to Northern State.

    • Asafum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Annnnnnnd they cancelled the local investigation due to FBI fuckery…

      FBI is blocking access to evidence so the local investigators said they can’t continue…

    • SillyGooseQuacked@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m hopeful that a civil lawsuit would succeed, but I think the officer will escape criminal liability because federal courts get to determine scope of duty/egregiousness of conduct before state courts can touch federal officers.

      That said, it’s still worth going after the guy criminally. He deserves prison and the AG should give it a shot.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        You’re following rules no one else does and only wanting to try if it’s guaranteed to succeed.

        Throw his ass in jail for murder with no bail

        He can beat the charges, but he’ll never get the months/years of his life back while awaiting trial

        Make it so in the back of every ICE agent’s head there’s a constant reminder: “There could be consequences”.

        Regardless of how we accomplish it, nothing gets fixed till that thought is always in their minds.

        • SillyGooseQuacked@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          You’re following rules no one else does and only wanting to try if it’s guaranteed to succeed.

          That’s categorically an opposite of what “that said, it’s still worth going after the guy criminally. He deserves prison and the AG should give it a shot” means, right?

          I said try even if it’s not guaranteed. My contribution to our conversation was opining on the likelihood of success.

          Throw his ass in jail for murder with no bail

          I’d love this, and think it’s unlikely.

          He can beat the charges, but he’ll never get the months/years of his life back while awaiting trial

          Make it so in the back of every ICE agent’s head there’s a constant reminder: “There could be consequences”.

          Regardless of how we accomplish it, nothing gets fixed till that thought is always in their minds.

          Yes to all of this!