An already fraught situation is now tipping into something far more dangerous.
A man identified in press reports as Alex Jeffrey Pretti was shot and killed this morning in Minneapolis by an unidentified Border Patrol agent. Minneapolis police chief Brian O’Hara says the deceased was a 37-year-old white male, apparently an American citizen, who was licensed to carry a firearm. The New York Times reports that Minnesota law authorizes citizens to carry guns openly in public.
Pretti was not the target of the immigration enforcement operation federal agents were conducting. He was an “observer,” watching and apparently recording the agents’ activities.
As in nearly all such incidents, video from multiple angles is rapidly circulating on social media. At this point, it remains unclear whether Pretti was armed at the moment he was shot. He appears to have become involved in an altercation with federal agents after possibly coming to the aid of another onlooker who had been pushed to the ground, grabbing that person during the encounter.
If the account provided by local police and other reporting is accurate, the statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appears dubious.
DHS told Fox News reporter Bill Melugin that the agents were engaged in a “targeted operation” against “an illegal alien wanted for violent assault.” During that operation, DHS claims, Pretti approached Border Patrol agents “with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun,” and the agency released a photograph of the firearm.
At this early stage, videos now circulating do not clearly establish whether Pretti had the gun in his possession during the altercation, whether he was disarmed during the struggle, or whether the agent who fired perceived Pretti as possessing or reaching for a weapon. The DHS photo merely depicts a handgun said to have been taken from Pretti; the agency has not specified whether it was seized from his person during the confrontation or afterward.
Despite the absence of anything resembling a completed investigation, DHS asserted conclusively that “the suspect”—apparently referring to Pretti, though it is difficult to see how he was a suspect at the time—“also had 2 magazines and no ID — this looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.”
Yet Pretti was apparently lawfully in possession of a firearm. And setting aside the unresolved question of where that firearm was during the encounter, it is clear that he had been observing numerous armed federal agents for some time prior to the altercation. If his intent truly had been to “massacre” officers and inflict “maximum damage,” he would have had ample opportunity to do so. It is therefore hard to understand how DHS could leap so quickly to such a conclusion.
Border Patrol agents have been deployed to cities such as Minneapolis as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has ramped up search-and-detention operations. DHS says the agent who shot Pretti acted “defensively,” claiming he was “fearing for his life and the lives and safety of fellow officers.”
DHS further alleges that agents attempted to disarm “the suspect,” who “violently resisted.”
Fox News adds that, following the shooting, “about 200 rioters quickly arrived on the scene and began to obstruct and assault law enforcement,” prompting what the government euphemistically calls “crowd control measures.”
Just as DHS has rushed to make sweeping claims, Democratic politicians have followed suit. Representative Ilhan Omar labeled the incident a “murder,” an “execution.” A state official described it as another instance of ICE “terrorizing the city.”
The Trump administration also chimed in on the incident.
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, never one to hesitate, declared Pretti a “domestic terrorist” and a “would-be assassin [who] tried to murder federal law enforcement.”
According to Chief O’Hara, federal agents attempted to take control of the scene, telling Minneapolis police they were not needed and could leave. O’Hara ordered his officers to remain and secure the scene, as local police ordinarily would in any fatal shooting.
To be clear, federal agents have jurisdiction over immigration crimes and related obstruction. That does not negate the authority of state and local police to investigate shootings on their streets, including shootings involving federal agents. Whether federal officers ultimately enjoy immunity or can remove any state charges to federal court are legal questions that can be litigated later. For now, federal agents have no authority to order state and local police to abandon the scene of a legitimate local investigation. Federal supremacy extends only to legitimate federal spheres; states remain sovereign within theirs, which include public safety and local law enforcement.
This is a breaking story. It would not be surprising if early reports prove incomplete or inaccurate as more facts emerge. That is precisely why it is a mistake—for Trump administration officials and Minnesota Democrats alike—to issue confident pronouncements before the smoke clears and an investigation is conducted.
%20(1).jpg)
