Minnesota Could Prosecute the ICE Shooter. Trump Can’t Pardon Him.
slate.com
Shortly after an ICE officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis, city leaders began looking into whether the officer had violated state criminal law.

Shortly after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday, city leaders began looking into whether the officer had violated state criminal law.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said, “We collectively are going to do everything possible to get to the bottom of this, to get justice, and to make sure that there is an investigation that is conducted in full.” Police Chief Brian O’Hara followed up by saying that the state’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is “investigat[ing] whether any state laws within the state of Minnesota have been violated.”

If they conclude that state law has been violated, the question is: What next? Contrary to recent assertions from some federal officials, states can prosecute federal officers for violating state criminal laws, and there is precedent for that.

  • Carmakazi@piefed.socialEnglish
    55·
    2 months ago

    Even in the bizarro world where an arrest warrant or indictment is issued, ICE will close ranks around their brother who just got a notch on his belt. No state cops are gonna slug it out with the feds to make that arrest.

  • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
    54·
    2 months ago

    Yeah sure.

    How many National Guard went to jail for the Kent State massacre?

    Zero. Four murdered, 9 maimed.

  • D_C@sh.itjust.works
    49·
    2 months ago

    Could means fuck all. The word that needs to be used is will.
    “Minnesota WILL prosecute the ice shooter.”
    When that is the title of an article then it means something. Until then it’s all may, might, and could. Weak shit.

    The Gestapo is murdering people on the street. Public executions on the streets of the Nazied States of America.

  • OshagHennessey@lemmy.world
    35·
    2 months ago

    They could. But they won’t. That would be more than just token resistance. Everybody knows the Dems are paid by corporations to only resist with words, motions, committees, and meaningless votes.

    If we want accountability, we’re going to have to demand it, like after George Floyd.

    Only once it becomes cheaper to appease us than resist us, will we be appeased.

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        6·
        2 months ago

        If you think we got to this point only because of Republicans… You haven’t been paying attention.

        No they’re not the same exactly, but democratic inaction is nearly as bad as it allows this kind of shit to happen.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            2 months ago

            Blaming the voters for rightly seeing the dems won’t fight for them either isn’t helping the situation.

            We wouldn’t be in this mess if the democratic party hadn’t made excuse after excuse. We’ve been betrayed over and over and that takes its toll on people.

            I still hold my nose and vote D because they’re the lesser of two evils clearly, but I can understand why so many are tuned out.

            • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
              3·
              2 months ago

              Did you know Democrats originally tried to make single payer a part of ACA?

              The problem is, they needed 60 votes in the Senate, and ONE Democrat, Joe Lieberman, joined EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN in voting against the public option.

              1 single Republican voter crossing the aisle could have delivered single payer, but idiots blame the Dems. Electing 1 more Democrat instead of a Republican could have delivered single payer, but idiots blame the Dems. 40 Republicans and 1 Democrat voted NO against Single Payer, and brilliant minds everywhere gargled BOTH SIDES SAME!! You can’t make this shit up.

              • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                2 months ago

                I did, the funny part is instead they literally went with Romney’s plan and still got shit on forever for it.

                Trying to reason and play politics with facists doesn’t work, and its long past time they learn that.

                Did you know the Democrats actively prop up republican nutjobs (financially supporting their campaigns) because they think it’s easier to win against them? One of those nutjobs was Donald Trump.

                You can’t make this shit up

      • OshagHennessey@lemmy.world
        3·
        2 months ago

        If voting R means corporatism and fascism, and voting D still means corporatism and fascism, just on the next election cycle instead of this one, who cares if there’s any technical distinction between them?

          • OshagHennessey@lemmy.world
            1·
            2 months ago

            Citizens don’t get meaningful reform against face shooting or accountability for face shooters under D either.

            The best we ever get is another public condemnation against face shooting and an empty threat to hold the next face shooter accountable, pinky swear this time.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    27·
    2 months ago

    Look what it took to get Chauvin prosecuted. If we want pigs to face justice, we have to speak at a volume they can hear us in their mansions.

    • Cruel@programming.dev
      2·
      2 months ago

      Chauvin wasn’t assaulted with what’s legally considered a dangerous weapon. So this case would be much harder. Unprecedented, really.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
        25·
        2 months ago

        Chauvin wasn’t assaulted

        That’s not what he claimed at the time. A big part of every cop-killer story is the allegation that the person they murdered prompted the killing. Chauvin insisted through his entire defense that Floyd lashed out at him in his final moments, right before he spontaneously died of a drug induced heart attack.

        We’ve got video clear as day of the ICE agent casually walking up to the car and plugging the woman in the face. This was a mother who’d just dropped her child off at daycare, not some marauding vehicular anti-ICE assassin. She was given seconds to respond to a command and butchered for failing to act fast enough.

      • garretble@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        2 months ago

        By the logic the government has tried to push on this murder, people should be able to shoot into the vehicles of ICE thugs when they try to drive through protest crowds. We’ve seen that on video plenty of times in the last year.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        Not an american but seems like US’ case law is very much precedented here. I don’t have a source at hand but there has been at least a dozen similar cases all sided with the victims. Even official training of ICE explicitly says “do not stand in front of the vehicle ever”.

        If there’s no justice here then it’s entirely on lack of will rather than law.

        • Cruel@programming.dev
          1·
          2 months ago

          Every case people cite are civil lawsuits for excessive force. And people usually don’t prevail, especially when an officer is actually in the process of being assaulted.

          At most, her family could get a settlement for damages for excessive force. But criminal charges are what would be pretty unprecedented.

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            I think it’s moot to discuss this without bringing up the actual law cases and I’m not going to lie - I’m a bit too lazy and this is too depressing for me to sacrifice my time for.

            My faith in US’ justice system is not great though so you might very well be right.

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.netEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        I hope that you never find yourself opposite an asshole cop who doesn’t care whether you actually pose any danger to them.

  • sexy_peach@feddit.orgEnglish
    25·
    2 months ago

    “Should”. Whatever this is just an article nothing is going to happen. Also I don’t really think prosecuting one officer is enough

      • Contextual Idiot@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        8·
        2 months ago

        You’re wrong about about what’s causing the apathy and disinterest. It’s not being caused by phones and tablets, social media addiction, or doomscrolling. Those are symptoms of the real problem.

        That 22 year old cashier is zoning out because that’s their 2nd or 3rd job, and they’re exhausted. Those folks who refuse to watch the video? Some of them simply can’t, because they’re burnt out from just trying to survive. Those cynical kids with no hope for the future? After 2 recessions and a pandemic, that’s kept them out of the jobs market, I can’t blame them.

        A lot of people are struggling to survive. Struggling to ensure they can keep a roof over their head, struggling to afford groceries, struggling to afford that car they need to get to the 2 or 3 jobs they work.

        The cost of living is ridiculous now, and wages are stagnant. A large amount of people are simply surviving. All their energy is going to getting their basic needs met, and not all are able to meet those needs. They can’t spare the attention to care about the rest of the world, when they are worrying about which bill to pay and which can wait. Or how to keep that car running just a bit longer until they can get it fixed.

        Trump and his goons are absolutely taking advantage of this too. Don’t fight back, or we’ll make things worse. Argue with us and we’ll take away that benefit you’re using to survive. So you’re absolutely right when you say something has to be done. And the sooner, the better. But understand that for those folks we are talking about, they won’t be able to help. Not yet. Unfortunately, things will have to get worse before they are forced to act. And not “ICE is killing more people” worse. It’ll be “I’m getting evicted, I can barely afford to eat, and a lot of people I know are the same.”

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
          2·
          2 months ago

          Good comment. You see a lot of why dont all Americans just strike? type comments from people living in countries with workers protections.

          • Contextual Idiot@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            I agree with you about the harms social media causes. It’s not helping matters at all, and actively harms people. But so does alcohol. Drinking can relax people, make them feel numb and happy for a short while. Doesn’t help them at all. But we don’t point the finger at alcohol, we say it’s a symptom of a larger problem. In this case I’m saying social media consumption is the same, just a symptom of a larger problem.

            And like alcohol, it doesn’t actually help at all. It just takes a person’s mind off their problems for a while. It lets them unplug and just mindlessly scroll Tiktok or Instagram. Say stupid shit on Twitter.

            Building community is an answer to this problem. Arguing on the internet is like yelling at the void, where speaking in person tends to make someone think more and be more mindful of what they say, since the repercussions are immediate and right on front of you. And it’s just better for the person too, getting to feel that connection to other people.

            The problem though, is that it takes a lot more effort, time, and money to participate in community. The people I’m talking about, simply can’t. They don’t have that time, energy, or money. They can’t afford to meet friends for dinner, even at each other’s homes. They can’t go meet friends at a nearby park because they’re exhausted from work. They can’t go hang out at a friend’s place because of the time commitment. The couple of hours they might have at the end of the day is spent browsing simply because it’s low energy and doesn’t cost them anything more. It’s the only thing that lets them unwind, or unplug, or blow off some steam.

            I think the answer is to have the community meet these people where they are. That’s a huge undertaking though, which is probably why we haven’t seen very much of it yet. But it’s going to be sorely needed.

  • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    13·
    2 months ago

    Trump may not be able to pardon him but he can invade the state, take over the prison, have puppets do it for him, whatever. He’s not bound by law anymore, he does whatever the fuck he wants and somehow all those dumb Americans just let him get away with everything.

    • fizzle@quokk.auEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      The imperialism thing is nuts. He would absolutely send many millions to their death or into poverty merely for his own glorification.

      • TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        9·
        2 months ago

        War crimes by invading Venezuela, kidnapping it’s “president”, taking bribes, pedophilia, influencing the stock market while profiting from it, shooting boats murdering its crew near Venezuela which are also war crimes, deporting us citizens, invading us cities, putting people in concentration camps in the US, Afrikan countries and El Salvador without process, the list goes on and on and on.

        But SCOTUS cleared him of prosecution for anything he does while being president.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 months ago

      The media can’t legally say “murder” unless/until there’s a conviction. So it’s either “alleged murderer” or “shooter”, and they definitely chose of the two, the one that ‘safely’ implies more guilt.

      One can’t really reasonably fault them for that choice, if one believes in his guilt, which you obviously do.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        3·
        2 months ago

        Yup, and it’s generally “alleged murderer” only after they’ve been charged.

        Knowing how the media uses these terms helps understand where along the line things are in terms of the justice system. If I read “murder” I’d assume the guy has been convicted (so justice is being served) because of the convention of not using that word until there’s a conviction. “Shooter” means he hasn’t even been charged, so I know there’s been no justice.

        It wouldn’t be good for the media to imply justice has been served when in reality it hasn’t. So it’s good that they call him a shooter so those of us with media literacy know the situation accurately.