Mark Halperin’s Take On Minnesota ICE Shooting Video Highlights Critical Details Others Overlooked
Mark Halperin on Wednesday analyzed the video of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shooting in Minnesota.
A federal agent fatally shot 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good during an ICE enforcement operation Wednesday, drawing angry responses from Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. On “2WAY Tonight,” Halperin focused on a sequence of events, urging viewers to slow the footage and assess what officers faced in real time during the encounter.
“So this is after the officers have approached the vehicle, and they’ve asked her to get out of the vehicle. And she backs up and then she starts going forward. Now, you’ll see three officers, the two closest to the vehicle are the most germane. One of them has asked her to get out. She’s declined. The other officer is the officer who shoots. You see him obscured in the background,” Halperin said. “And I think the critical question for us here as we’ve watched these is, does he fire at her before he’s hit by the car? Even then, that wouldn’t mean it wouldn’t be this positive that it’s murder, but does he fire after he’s hit?”
Halperin urged viewers to look at the incident through the officer’s perspective.
WATCH:
“Imagine from his point of view. They’ve asked her to get out. She hits the accelerator, and she hits him. What’s he supposed to do at that point? He’s holding a gun. What’s he supposed to do?” Halperin asked. “Play number two, please. This is a different angle, and it’s the angle that’s the clearest. You can see, again, it’s a little bit from a distance, but it’s the clearest angle that shows, without a doubt, that the car hits him.”
Halperin said a clearer camera angle removes doubt about the critical moment in the ICE shooting.
“Again, there’s no doubt. There’s some angles people have seen. You can’t tell that the car hits him. This angle makes it clear. The car does hit him. And it appears from the audio and the video that, again, he fires only after, only after he’s hit,” Halperin said. “Play number six, please. Car backs up. This is in slow motion. Car backs up, and then it goes forward. Very close there in terms of the timing, but it appears that he is hit by the car speeding towards him.”
ICE agents have faced escalating violence in recent months, with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem saying the officer involved in Wednesday’s Minneapolis incident had already survived a June attack.
“Over 100 of these vehicle rammings happen in just recent weeks, and this must stop. ICE alone is facing a 1,300% increase in assaults against them and an 8,000% increase in death threats against all of them,” Noem said. “In fact, the very same officer who was attacked today had previously been dragged by an anti-ICE rioter who had rammed him with a car and drug him back in June. He sustained injuries at that time as well. And let me remind you why we’re all here in this city today and why we’ve been here.”
Noem said that the Department of Justice should classify vehicle attacks on law enforcement as domestic terrorism and pursue charges accordingly. She argued that using cars as weapons against officers amounts to coordinated terrorist activity and said the administration intends to bring it to an end.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org
In 2026, the legal landscape surrounding “officer-created danger”—specifically where officers move into the path of a vehicle—is defined by a critical 2025 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that emphasizes the totality of circumstances over the immediate “moment of threat”.
The “Officer-Created Danger” Principle
The principle of “created danger” or “officer-created jeopardy” posits that if an officer’s own reckless actions—such as stepping in front of a moving car—create the need for lethal force, that force may be considered unconstitutionally excessive.
Rejection of the “Moment of Threat”: In the landmark case Barnes v. Felix (decided May 2025), the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the narrow “moment of threat” doctrine. This doctrine previously allowed courts to ignore an officer’s pre-shooting conduct if they faced an immediate threat at the exact second they fired.
Totality of Circumstances: Under the current 2026 standard, courts must evaluate whether an officer’s decisions leading up to the shooting were “objectively reasonable”. This includes whether the officer unnecessarily escalated the situation by placing themselves in harm’s way.
Use of Force Against Vehicles
Modern law enforcement policies and judicial rulings in 2026 strictly limit the use of deadly force against vehicles when alternatives exist:
Duty to Disengage: Many jurisdictions now explicitly require officers to move out of the path of a vehicle rather than firing at it.
Deadly Force as a Last Resort: For example, the U.S. Department of Justice policy states that firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless the vehicle is being used as a weapon and “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist,” specifically including moving out of the path.
Inherent Ineffectiveness: Policies often highlight that shooting at a moving vehicle is generally ineffective and creates additional risks, such as a disabled driver losing control of a multi-ton car.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/unresolved-question-barnes-v-felix-officer-created-mikayla-hamilton-xajsc