In brief: In January 2026, federal immigration agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis: Renee Good on January 7 and Alex Pretti on January 24. Before the shootings, a narrow majority of Americans already felt ICE had gone too far; afterward, the share jumped to nearly two-thirds. Nine months later, no one has been charged in either death, and the shootings have become a turning point in how Americans think about immigration enforcement.
What happened in Minneapolis?
In January, the administration’s Operation Metro Surge sent thousands of immigration agents into the Twin Cities. On January 7, ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot Renee Good, 37, through the windshield of her car in south Minneapolis. Federal officials said she had “weaponized her vehicle”; bystander video and local officials contradicted that account. On January 24, Border Patrol agents shot and killed Alex Pretti, 37, an intensive care nurse, during a protest. Federal officials called him a “domestic terrorist”; video of the encounter again told a different story.
Both were American citizens. Neither was the target of an immigration case.
Where do the cases stand nine months later?
No one has been charged in either death. Federal authorities withheld evidence from Minnesota prosecutors for more than six months, arguing the shootings were “solely federal” matters, until the state sued and obtained hard drives, body camera footage and Good’s damaged SUV in July. Hennepin County prosecutors are still reviewing the cases. On October 1, Good’s family filed two civil lawsuits against the federal government, the agent and senior officials. “Our government is killing our citizens without any legal justification,” the family’s attorney said. The only criminal charges from the January surge so far came in a separate, non-fatal shooting, after surveillance video contradicted an agent’s account.
How did Americans feel about ICE before the shootings?
Support for tougher immigration enforcement helped elect President Trump in 2024, and border security remains one of his stronger issues. But unease with how enforcement was being carried out was already growing. In June 2025, 54% of Americans told the PBS News/NPR/Marist Poll that ICE had gone too far. In July 2025, 49% of voters told Fox News that ICE was too aggressive. Many Americans supported deporting people with criminal records while feeling uncomfortable with masked agents, workplace raids and arrests of long-time residents with no criminal history. In Minneapolis, fewer than one in four people arrested during the surge had a criminal conviction.
How did the shootings change the national mood?
After the shootings, the numbers moved quickly. By late January, 65% told Marist that ICE had gone too far, and 62% said ICE’s actions make Americans less safe. Fox News found 59% of voters calling ICE too aggressive, up ten points in six months, with the biggest shifts among independents (up 22 points), moderates (up 19) and Republican women (up 14). Support for abolishing ICE doubled from 18% in 2018 to 36%.
Republicans remain largely supportive of the agency. But the movement among independents and moderates, the voters who decide elections, is what changed the politics. By September, voters opposed the idea of ICE agents at polling places by 30 points.
Why did two deaths move opinion so much?
The identifiable victim effect. Psychologists have long found that people respond far more strongly to one named person than to statistics. Hundreds of thousands of deportations are an abstraction; a nurse shot on video is not. Renee Good and Alex Pretti gave the public faces and names.
“It could have been me.” Both victims were citizens, which collapsed the psychological distance many Americans felt from immigration enforcement. When people believe a policy only affects others, they can support it in the abstract. When they see it reach people like themselves, the calculation changes.
When the official story doesn’t match the video. Trust erodes fastest when people see one thing and are told another. Describing a nurse as a “domestic terrorist” while video circulated showing otherwise did more than anger critics; it gave undecided Americans a reason to doubt every subsequent statement from the agency.
The absence of accountability. Nine months without charges, and months of withheld evidence, feed a sense that the rules do not apply to those in power. That feeling, more than any single policy, is what tends to turn a controversy into a lasting shift in mood.
Benefits and drawbacks
Supporters of strict enforcement argue that a few tragic incidents should not undo a policy most Americans wanted, and that agents face real danger in hostile crowds. Those are serious points, and the investigations should be allowed to reach their own conclusions.
But public consent is part of law enforcement. An agency that loses the trust of the middle of the country loses its ability to do its job. The lesson from Minneapolis is that Americans will support enforcement they see as targeted, lawful and accountable, and recoil from enforcement that looks indiscriminate and unanswerable. Nine months on, the families are still waiting for answers. So, in a sense, is the country.
Related commentary
- The Supreme Court Opens a New Term With Its Trust at a Low
- Zero Tolerance Immigration Policy (2018)
- Four Weeks Out: The Midterm Map and the Psychology of a Wave
Sources
- PBS NewsHour — Minnesota prosecutors obtain long-withheld evidence (July 13, 2026)
- FOX 9 — Minneapolis ICE shootings: where the criminal investigations stand (Oct. 1, 2026)
- MPR News — Renee Good family files lawsuits (Oct. 1, 2026)
- NPR — Months after the ICE shootings, a federal probe remains elusive (Apr. 10, 2026)
- PBS News/NPR/Marist Poll — Nearly two-thirds say ICE has gone too far
- Fox News Poll — 59% say ICE too aggressive (Jan. 2026)
- Strength In Numbers/Verasight — Voters oppose ICE at the polls (Sept. 2026)
