Leavitt Defends ICE Shooting, Dismisses Renee Good Protesters
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed Minneapolis protesters demonstrating against the fatal shooting of 37-year-old poet and mother Renee Good by ICE officer Jonathan Ross, questioning their grievances during a Monday press gaggle. Leavitt framed the killing as justified self-defense, claiming Good rammed Ross with her vehicle during what she characterized as an organized effort to impede law enforcement operations. Vice President JD Vance has falsely claimed the officer is protected by absolute immunity, a legal assertion that contradicts established law.
Leavitt attacked protesters by asserting they opposed ICE’s removal of individuals she described as “heinous murderers and rapists and criminals,” framing opposition to the agency as protection of “illegal alien pedophiles” rather than engagement with the specific circumstances of Good’s death. She declared ICE performs a critical national security function and pledged the administration’s full support for “the brave men and women of ice, including the officer in Minneapolis.” This rhetorical strategy conflated general immigration enforcement with the narrow question of whether Ross’s use of lethal force was proportional and lawful.
Protesters have explicitly demanded ICE’s removal from their communities, justice for Good, and state involvement in the shooting investigation—specific demands grounded in accountability for the killing itself. President Trump has blocked Minnesota state investigators from the probe, citing the state’s purportedly “corrupt” government, centralizing control over the investigation in federal hands where the Trump administration exercises direct authority over the Department of Justice.
Video evidence of the incident has been widely described as a “Rorschach Test” reflecting observers’ preexisting political positions rather than settling disputed facts about whether Good’s actions constituted a lethal threat requiring deadly force in response. Leavitt’s dismissal of protesters’ concerns sidestepped the substantive questions surrounding the shooting itself, instead reframing the event within an immigration enforcement narrative designed to delegitimize dissent.