Woman shot and killed by ICE officers in Minneapolis, Minnesota

Obstruction: what's allowed/ not allowed in legal first amendment activity was considered by the judge.

The defendant's/DHS relied on 18 USC section 111 to define "obstruction" wherein it states it is a crime to "forcibly assault, resist, impede or intimidate or interfere with an Federal officer
engaged in the performance of their duties". The defendants/DHS defence in the cases of the various plaintiffs relied on this- and it is the refrain we see and hear from DHS most often in media outlets- and from Kirsti Noem soon after Renee Good's fatal shooting.

E.g. Page 58 the defendants/DHS argued for example that one of the plaintiffs, Noor, was protesting "in a violent protest and therefore not engaged in protected First Amendment activity and therefore there was probable cause to arrest him", even if such judgement was "mistaken" (this was another defence strategy tactic at various stages).

The judge rejected the defendant's claim on all counts as at no time could Noor be seen "physically interfering with the agents, nor threatening them". Therefore there was "no basis to conclude the officers had even a mistaken probable cause to place him under arrest. The judge concluded Noor will likely succeed on the merits of his claim he was arrested in retaliation for engaging in protected First Amendment Right activity"- page 59.

Relating this precedent to Renee Good's shooting, in the real time video evidence I saw and vent the ICE officers video released a bit later, did not show her "physically interfering with the agents, nor threatening them". ICE officer released video evidence begins with her in a stationary vehicle with her saying "Thats fine dude, I"m not mad at you"- another ICE officer said "get out of the car" (but ICE officers didn't have any grounds to stop her or order her to get out of her car according to this judge ) several times, shots then heard- vehicle then drives ands swerves then finishes.

I would assume any potential, post mortem litigation for Renee Good might rely on this legal interpretation and precedent to claim that at no stage was Renee Good "physically interfering with the agents, nor threatening them" and therefore the ICE officer in question had no probable cause, or even mistaken probable cause, to conclude she was engaged in criminal activity. On that basis a claim could potentially be made that ICE denied Good her First Amendment right activity.


The defendants in this case used the grounds that the plaintiffs were obstructing them in their duties- clearly The defendants definition of "obstruction" was not found evidenced.

I do hope it does go to trial, for Kristi Noem.

LemonJam

imaround 05.38- the order is a court injunction and has to be disseminated to all agents in Minnesota Operation Surge Metro within 72 hours.

I would suggest this order emboldens Minnesota residents to continue with heir protests and take video evidence and if they see any officer breach the order, are able to report such behaviour providing their evidence to police authorities accordingly. Plus no doubt they will be emboldened to shared with media outlets.

Yes, as long as they are not emboldened to be violent or obstructive.
After what happened recently tho, I have my doubts that they would.

Sorry, I apologise for my mistake in my 13.37 post Kristi Noel and all others are the Defendants in this case.

Starfire 06.40: Good point. If protesters continue to harass and obstruct, which btw obstruction isn't just unpeaceful, it's against the law, then it's not peaceful and this order means nothing, really".

I respectfully disagree- the injunction order, disseminated to all federal agents in Operation Surge Metro in Minnesota means they must obey and comply. The 83 page court judges determination also sets out what protestors can do when they are exercising their First amendment protest rights thereby not breaking the law.

imaround 05.38- the order is a court injunction and has to be disseminated to all agents in Minnesota Operation Surge Metro within 72 hours.

I would suggest this order emboldens Minnesota residents to continue with heir protests and take video evidence and if they see any officer breach the order, are able to report such behaviour providing their evidence to police authorities accordingly. Plus no doubt they will be emboldened to shared with media outlets.

Thank you LemonJam!

I think this is an important time to circle back to this article after that amazing recap of the restraining order.

www.fox9.com/news/border-patrol-chief-was-outright-lying-about-previous-ice-surge

David 05.27- the court case just quoted included plaintiff's named but closely situated to events in question. They did throw things, e.g snowballs etc at the agents. The judge considered they were not outside their rights to protest under first amendment and they were not arrested.

I was struck by the approach and case presention of the Defendants. The key and often quoted defence of ICE enforcement actions against individuals claiming they were obstructing or interfering with their duties. Plus no sworn affidavit witness evidence provided at all, which undermined its defence.

This case precedent and order disseminated to Operation Surge Metro ICE officers makes clear they MUST NOT retaliate
against persons engaging in peaceful and unobstructive protest activities or detain anyone in retaliation towards "protected conduct" and "in the absence of showing probable cause or reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime etc. This precedent and referral to this injunction order can be considered in the Good investigation and outcome report. The use of bystander real time video and audio evidence should necessarily be taken into account as this judge ordered that those in the vicinity were exercising their first amendment rights by securing such evidence.

The order explicitly sets out that Federal Officers must not stop or detain drivers and passengers where there is no reasonable , articulable suspicion they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with covered federal agents, or otherwise violating 18 USC section 111. Now this order sets that precedence and expectation, it would be remiss for the GOOD shooting investigation not to include this consideration and necessarily provide sworn affidavit evidence to support its case. If it does not I would suggest DHS opens itself up to litigation risk.

there eyes and ears believe there eyes and ears

ronib

I don’t understand how the USA finds itself without the capacity for individual, rational thought. I am almost encouraged to think that the UK isn’t that bad…. MaizieD. How can one man take over the capacity for individual thoughts and analysis? Mass hypnosis?

There is a method that has been explained many times on here. I do wonder if religion and the types of "Christianity" practiced in the USA sets people up to be instructed and not, necessarily, there eyes and ears.

I have taken the time to read the Court document in full and form my view of some key considerations- though others of course are free to form any alternate views. There are six named plaintiffs, "on behalf of all similarly other situated individuals", ie residents of Minnesota. The named Plaintiff's Kristi Norm, Secretary DHS, Acting Director of ICE, Acting Executive Associate Director Enforcement and Removal Operations, Acting Field Officer ERO, The Department of Homeland Security, Unidentified Federal Agencies and their Agents, in their official capacities.

1) The Injunction stays in place until all parties in the case- the public plaintiffs and the Defendants- Homeland Security/ICE believe Operation Surge Metro ends in Minnesota, or the order is deemed no longer necessary, so a motion can then be filed for its termination- last few pages of document.

2) The Plaintiff's allege retaliatory behaviour by ICE officers , including traffic stops, arrests, indiscriminate use of chemical irritants ( e.g. pepper spray) and pointing of firearms when they were expressing their First Amendment rights, i.e. peaceful protest. Page 43, and that their rights were interfered with as a result of enforcement officer's actions.

Such protest included for example, following ICE officers and their vehicles, recording their activities, sharing what ICE is doing in their community etc which had led to ICE officers to stopping them, accusing them of impeding or interfering with federal investigations, instructing them not to engage in this method of observation, observers (those situated in vicinity ) making comments against agents, throwing snowballs etc- plaintiff's actions set out in their respective evidence sections.

3) The Defendants argued that ICE officers had "a reasonable, if mistaken belief that there was probable cause to arrest in their defence", e.g. in relation to one of the Plaintiff's, Tincher, there was "probable cause" to arrest her as it is a crime to forcibly assault, resist, impede or intimidate or interfere with a Federal Officer engaged in the performance of their duties- page 57. The court noted Tincher's protected conduct was not limited to speech but rather included observing and protesting whcih she was doing peacefully in a public space when she was arrested- page 58.

4) The court found the evidence did not support any "interference" that officers could have reasonably formed a mistaken belief as probable cause to arrest Tincher, her pre arrest speech was neutral and could not have motivated retaliation".

5) The Plaintiff's introduced "powerful evidence" of the Federal Defendant's ongoing, sustained pattern of conduct that resulted in numerous injuries to those exercising their First Amendment rights in this case and finding an imminent risk of future injury under similar circumstances- page 44.

6) The judge found that the stopping and questioning of Plaintiffs by the Federal agents they followed and their seizures to be "unlawful under the Fourth Amendment and future seizure risk "sufficiently imminent and "sustained"- page 45.

7) Another Plaintiff-Noor, the judge found at no time could Noor be seen physically interfering with the agents, nor threatening them therefore no basis to conclude the officers had even "mistaken probable cause to place him under arrest". That Noor is "likely to succeed on the merits of his claim he was arrested in retaliation for engaging in protected First Amendment activities- page 57.

8) The judge determined the Defendants did not explain why it was necessary for them to arrest and use force against peaceful observers like the named Plaintiffs, and non violent protesters nearby to curb their activities like video recording. Nor did Defendants explain how the Public Interest is served by officers stopping law abiding motorists "without reasonable, particularised suspicion of criminal wrongdoing"- page 71.

9) The judge determined recording law enforcement activities through video recordings or audio on a cell phone is generally public protected conduct under First Amendment. Ice seizure of phones or ordering people to stop recording is an infringement of those rights.

The order is set out from page 79 and should be distributed to all covered Federal agents in Operation Surge Metro within 72 hours and to any newly deployed agents and to all the defendants.

The Plaintiffs can now go forward with their litigation with this injunction order in place.

"A major victory. A federal judge has ruled that ICE must stop targeting peaceful protesters and legal observers who are not suspected of any crimes. The order prohibits retaliation, arrests without probable cause, the use of pepper spray or crowd-control weapons, and vehicle stops made without reasonable suspicion. It also makes clear that simply monitoring or following ICE from a safe distance does not justify a stop or detention." Alt National Park Service on Facebook.

By tapping into the divisions and prejudices which already exist, and magnifying them. People who are already resentful respond to hearing that someone in power agrees with them and says they are going to do something about it. ( certainly if they are aware of their resentment and even if only unconscious of it.)

The US is big and diverse, and there are many different cultures and attitudes. There are white versus black and brown, city slickers vs country bumpkins, ex-Confederate states vs Union states, rich vs poor, professors vs educational drop-outs, techies vs back-to-simplicity, global travellers vs no-passports, male supremacists vs women's libbers. law-obeyers vs free spirits, religious vs atheists.

The more groups can be set against each other to argue bitterly, the more control central authority can exert against them all.

I don’t understand how the USA finds itself without the capacity for individual, rational thought. I am almost encouraged to think that the UK isn’t that bad…. MaizieD. How can one man take over the capacity for individual thoughts and analysis? Mass hypnosis?

My understanding is that Trump needs to find a way to legitimise the status of migrants.

He's hardly going to do that, is he, ronib?

Being anti immigrants is one of his most potent vote catching policies.

"seek out and imprison immigrants who can't present paper confirmation"

Whitewavemark2

The British customs used to carry officers commissions which outlined their powers and authority.

Don’t know if they still do. It was rather lovely historical document.

With regard to the local police in Minnesota. The issue is that because ICE has flooded the area, there isn’t sufficient local police to deal with it all. There are far more ICE than police in the area.

"The issue is that because ICE has flooded the area, there isn’t sufficient local police to deal with it all. There are far more ICE than police in the area."

It is divide and conquer and sow division and hatred, exactly as described in Machiavelli's book. Take down resistance to federal/Trump/cabal control by flooding one city at a time with all-half-trained and some-half-feral ICE agents.

Today they seek out and imprison immigrants, including those whose acceptance is pending. Tomorrow those who made public those brutalities which have not been investigated as thoroughly as similar incidents would be under the police. After that it could be anyone who criticises the regime in power.

Stephen Miller's plan for action, written before Trump was elected President, is a straight rewrite of Machiavelli.

My understanding is that Trump needs to find a way to legitimise the status of migrants. The USA, like the rest of the world, depends on healthy workers to fill jobs in an ageing population. It’s in everyone’s interests to work this through to some beneficial solution. And yes, it’s up to the elected government to decide on the ground rules for awarding or denying migrant status.

The British customs used to carry officers commissions which outlined their powers and authority.

Don’t know if they still do. It was rather lovely historical document.

With regard to the local police in Minnesota. The issue is that because ICE has flooded the area, there isn’t sufficient local police to deal with it all. There are far more ICE than police in the area.

Why aren’t the local police there doing anything? Surely they need to be a presence when any large group are protesting?
It shouldn’t be left to immigration to try and do their own job and keep protesters at bay.
If they had been there then they would have told the woman in the car to park it properly and join other protesters and this tragedy would never have happened.

But customs have power to search and enter because they are following the goods, not the person.

Saying all that they do have the power of arrest. Just like the police, our customs officers never carry arms, unlike European agents.

Whitewavemark2

Whitewavemark2

imaround

A judge has issued a temporary restraining order against ICE in Minnesota. They are not allowed to interfere or arrest peaceful protesters.

This is the actual court document.

www.documentcloud.org/documents/26491067-tinchertro011626pdf/

Yes I saw that. I am surprised that they can interfere with any citizen, other than illegals immigrants.

In the U.K. the border force will always work in coordination with the. Police.

So each agency and citizen are clear as to their remit,

Police - police behaviour.

Border force deal with immigration - and other stuff.

It seems that ICE has morphed from the traditional customs and border roll into some sort of out of control militia, which remit is not very well understood either by themselves or the population.

This is correct, customs and immigration officers in the UK have police to do the arrests, however customs do have more powers to search and enter without warrant.

Different country different rules, they all have guns too

Whitewavemark2

imaround

A judge has issued a temporary restraining order against ICE in Minnesota. They are not allowed to interfere or arrest peaceful protesters.

This is the actual court document.

www.documentcloud.org/documents/26491067-tinchertro011626pdf/

Yes I saw that. I am surprised that they can interfere with any citizen, other than illegals immigrants.

In the U.K. the border force will always work in coordination with the. Police.

So each agency and citizen are clear as to their remit,

Police - police behaviour.

Border force deal with immigration - and other stuff.

It seems that ICE has morphed from the traditional customs and border roll into some sort of out of control militia, which remit is not very well understood either by themselves or the population.

David49

imaround

A judge has issued a temporary restraining order against ICE in Minnesota. They are not allowed to interfere or arrest peaceful protesters.

This is the actual court document.

www.documentcloud.org/documents/26491067-tinchertro011626pdf/

Then you have to decide what is peaceful, in the tradgedy that happened it has been claimed that the woman attacked the officer with her car. Certainly objects have been thrown at ICE, that can be interpreted as attacking.

Does this ruling change anything??

Good point. If protesters continue to harass and obstruct, which btw obstruction isn't just unpeaceful, it's against the law, then it's not peaceful and this order means nothing, really.