Listen to the article
Immigration expert Lora Ries has challenged attempts by Democrats to portray the fatal shooting of anti-ICE protester Renee Nicole Good as comparable to the George Floyd killing, asserting that the narrative is “just not sticking” with the public.
The incident, which occurred Wednesday in Minneapolis, has sparked protests across the city and nationwide. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer shot and killed Good during a confrontation. The Trump administration maintains the agent fired in self-defense after Good allegedly attempted to run him over with her vehicle.
Prominent Democrats have responded with outrage. Hillary Clinton characterized the incident as “murder” in a social media post, stating that “in the face of this administration’s lawless violence, solidarity is the answer.” Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey used expletives while telling ICE to leave Minneapolis, a sentiment echoed by Rep. Ilhan Omar, who posted, “Get out of our city” to the Department of Homeland Security.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz noted that the state’s National Guard was prepared to deploy if necessary, adding, “We’ve never been at war with our federal government.”
In an interview with Fox News Digital, Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, pointed to significant changes in the media landscape since Floyd’s death in 2020. She cited declining trust in mainstream media and the rise of independent journalism as factors preventing the narrative from taking hold.
“This isn’t 2020 anymore, and a lot of Americans’ eyes have opened during 2020 from the COVID shutdowns, the mandates, the censorship, the nightly riots, the election fraud, and it’s just not going to work anymore,” Ries said. “People can see what’s really happening and decide for themselves.”
Vice President JD Vance revealed during a Thursday news conference that the ICE agent involved had been injured in a similar incident six months earlier, when he was dragged by a car and required 33 stitches to his leg. Vance suggested this past trauma might have made the agent “a little bit sensitive about somebody ramming him with an automobile.”
Ries noted that while progressives have targeted various law enforcement agencies in the past, current activism is specifically focused on ICE. “The left is aiming all of its ire and even literally its fire at ICE, not any other federal agency, not the DEA going after drugs or fentanyl, not the FBI, not even defund the police anymore. It is solely ICE,” she observed.
She attributed this targeted opposition to political motives: “Because ICE is deporting their political base. The left has built their political house of cards on mass migration, immigration fraud.” Ries argued that these policies affect congressional districting and electoral college votes, adding, “This is all about politics.”
Regarding Good, Ries challenged the victim narrative, noting reports that Good had come from out of state and had allegedly been “harassing, tracking, stalking ICE agents all day long.” She claimed the agents appeared to know Good, and that Good failed to comply with orders to exit the vehicle.
“If people come here and break the law, then that’s their choice. That is their decision, and they should be personally responsible for that,” Ries said. “We, as a sovereign nation, enforcing our laws, should deport them. And there’s nothing wrong with that. We shouldn’t apologize for it.”
The shooting has intensified national debate over immigration enforcement tactics under the Trump administration and raised questions about the appropriate use of force by federal agents. As investigations continue, the incident highlights the deep political divisions surrounding immigration policy in America.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
18 Comments
The expert raises a fair point about the public perception of these comparisons. While the loss of life is tragic, the circumstances appear to be quite different. Careful consideration of the facts is warranted before making sweeping statements.
That’s a reasonable assessment. Emotions often run high in these situations, but maintaining perspective and following the evidence is crucial for meaningful dialogue and progress.
The expert’s caution about the effectiveness of drawing comparisons to George Floyd’s case is understandable. While the loss of life is tragic, the circumstances appear to be quite different. A thorough, fact-based investigation is necessary before making sweeping statements.
Agreed. Maintaining a balanced perspective and following the evidence is crucial in these situations. Rushing to judgment and drawing parallels without a full understanding of the facts risks further inflaming tensions and hindering productive dialogue.
The expert’s perspective on the potential ineffectiveness of comparing this incident to George Floyd’s case is worth considering. While the desire for justice is understandable, it’s important to ensure any comparisons are supported by the facts and circumstances. A measured, nuanced approach may be more productive.
That’s a fair assessment. Maintaining objectivity and avoiding premature conclusions is crucial in sensitive situations like this. A thoughtful, evidence-based discussion is more likely to lead to meaningful progress and understanding.
The expert raises valid points about the potential ineffectiveness of comparing this incident to George Floyd’s death. While the desire for justice is understandable, it’s important to ensure any comparisons are warranted and constructive. A measured, nuanced approach may be more productive.
That’s a reasonable assessment. Emotions often run high in these situations, but maintaining objectivity and following the evidence is crucial for meaningful progress. A thoughtful, fact-based discussion is more likely to lead to positive outcomes.
This is a complex and sensitive situation. While emotions are understandably high, it’s important to carefully examine the facts and circumstances before drawing conclusions. Comparing this incident to George Floyd’s death may not be the most effective approach.
Agreed. Rushing to judgement without a thorough investigation risks inflaming tensions further. A measured, objective analysis is needed to understand what happened and address any issues appropriately.
The expert raises valid concerns about the potential ineffectiveness of comparing this incident to George Floyd’s death. While the loss of life is tragic, the circumstances appear to be quite different. A measured, fact-based discussion is needed to understand what happened and address any issues appropriately.
Agreed. Rushing to judgment and drawing parallels without a thorough investigation risks further inflaming tensions. A balanced, objective analysis is necessary to ensure any comparisons are warranted and constructive.
This is a complex and sensitive issue, and the expert’s perspective on the potential ineffectiveness of drawing comparisons to George Floyd’s case is worth considering. Careful analysis of the facts and circumstances is essential before making sweeping claims.
That’s a fair point. Emotions can run high, but maintaining objectivity and nuance is crucial when addressing issues of this nature. A thoughtful, evidence-based approach is more likely to lead to meaningful progress.
The expert’s perspective on the potential ineffectiveness of drawing comparisons to George Floyd’s case is worth considering. While the loss of life is tragic, the circumstances appear to be quite different. A thorough, evidence-based investigation is necessary before making any definitive conclusions.
Agreed. Rushing to judgment and making sweeping statements without a full understanding of the facts risks further inflaming tensions and hindering productive dialogue. A measured, nuanced approach is more likely to lead to meaningful progress.
The experts’ caution about the effectiveness of comparing this incident to George Floyd is understandable. These cases can have nuanced differences that require careful examination. Rushing to draw parallels may not be the most constructive approach.
Agreed. While the desire for justice is admirable, it’s important to ensure any comparisons are warranted and productive. A measured, fact-based discussion is more likely to lead to positive outcomes.