By Jack Queen and Tom Hals
NEW YORK, Jan 8 (Reuters) – A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed a 37-year-old woman in her car in Minneapolis on Wednesday amid President Donald Trump’s federal crackdown.
Local officials rejected the Trump administration’s explanation that it was self-defense.
Here is a look at the potential legal repercussions.
WHAT HAPPENED?
The officer fired “defensive shots” after a “violent rioter” attempted to run over officers, a spokeswoman of the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement, adding that the officer had feared for his life.
Online videos of the shooting verified by Reuters cast doubt on the government’s narrative, however.
One video showed an officer approach an SUV and order the driver out and grab at the door handle while another officer appeared in front of the car.
The driver moves forward while turning away from the officers, and the one in front pulls his weapon, steps back and fires three shots.
It was not clear if the car made contact with the officer, and he fired at least one shot after it had already passed him.
WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY?
Minnesota’s use-of-force law permits state police to use deadly force only if reasonable officers would believe doing so was necessary to protect themselves, or others, from death or serious harm.
Federal law has a similar standard, permitting use of deadly force when a reasonable officer would have probable cause to believe a person posed an immediate threat of death or serious injury.
COULD THE OFFICER BE PROSECUTED?
Federal agents are generally immune from state prosecution for actions taken as part of their official duties. Immunity only applies when an officer’s actions were authorized under federal law and were necessary and proper.
If Minnesota charged the agent, he could seek to move the case to federal court and argue he is immune from prosecution.
To prevail, the state would have to show the actions were outside his official duties or were objectively unreasonable or clearly unlawful.
If a judge ruled the officer was immune, the case would be dismissed and the state would not be able to charge him again.
COULD FEDERAL PROSECUTORS CHARGE THE OFFICER?
Federal prosecutors can charge law enforcement officers for fatal shootings, but the bar is very high and charges are rare.
Prosecutors would need to show the officer knew his conduct was unlawful or acted with reckless disregard for the constitutional limits of his authority, which is difficult to prove in court.
The Trump administration has so far defended the officer’s actions.
WHAT DEFENSES WOULD THE ICE AGENT HAVE?
In addition to federal immunity, the agent could argue that his actions were reasonable under the Constitution, that he acted in self-defense or that he did not act with intent to harm or kill the woman.
COULD THE DRIVER’S FAMILY SUE FOR CIVIL DAMAGES?
Federal officers are immune from civil lawsuits unless their conduct clearly violated a clear constitutional right.
This legal standard, known as qualified immunity, has become a highly effective tool for shielding police officers accused of using excessive force, a series of Reuters investigative stories found in 2020.
(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware and Jack Queen in New York; Editing by Amy Stevens and Clarence Fernandez)
Comments