Can anyone stop ICE?

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Today, Explained – Can anyone stop ICE?

Date: January 14, 2026
Hosts: Noel King & Ian Millhiser (Vox)
Featured Guest: Madison McVan (Minnesota Reformer), Vice President J.D. Vance (audio clips)

---

Overview

This episode examines the escalating tensions between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and Minneapolis residents following the controversial killing of Renee Goode by an ICE agent. Host Noel King, speaking with local reporter Madison McVan and legal analyst Ian Millhiser, unpacks the tactics of community observers, declining public support for ICE, the muddled legal investigations, and the thorny question of accountability for federal law enforcement.

---

1. The ICE Surge and Citizen Response

[00:00–02:25]

• Context: ICE presence surged in Minneapolis after the killing of Renee Goode by an ICE officer spurred outrage, protests, and further scrutiny.
• Public Opinion: Support for ICE has fallen sharply, with a recent poll showing 46% of Americans want the agency abolished.
• Citizen Observers:
  • Residents are organizing to follow and film ICE agents, aiming to disrupt or deter arrests.
  • These tactics are credited by participants with reducing ICE's willingness to stop and question people.
  • Observers organize via group chats and coordinated patrols.
  • Quote:

    "The idea is that if residents follow ICE and record them, that they can possibly prevent arrest from taking place at all."
    — Madison McVan (02:26)

---

2. On the Ground: How ICE and Observers Interact

[02:52–06:57]

• Observer Tactics:
  • Typically one driver and one passenger, constantly communicating with a broader network.
  • When ICE suspects it's being tailed, agents often perform evasive maneuvers and confront observers directly.
  • ICE agents sometimes threaten observers with arrest for perceived "obstruction."
  • Dramatic Incident:
    • In a ride-along, McVan witnessed ICE agents intimidating observers, looking up their identities, and even showing up at one observer's home.
    • One observer, Patti, had her window smashed by an agent, was handcuffed, and detained—though later released without charges.
    • Quote:

      "The driver of the car said, 'You guys gotta stop obstructing us. That's why that lesbian is dead.'"
      — Madison McVan (06:29)

---

3. The Roots and Evolution of Local Activism

[07:07–09:50]

• Organizing Background:
  • Minneapolis has a strong tradition of community mobilization, catalyzed by past events like the George Floyd protests.
  • Activists include parents, church members, average citizens, and longtime organizers.
  • Rapid response networks have evolved from reactive crowd-gathering to proactive surveillance of ICE activity.
• Inclusivity and Anonymity:
  • Organizer identities remain anonymous; Renee Goode’s involvement with these groups is unconfirmed.
  • Quote:

    "It's people who have a lot of time and identify as activists. And it's also people who are commuting to work in the suburbs, saying, let me take a different route today to see if I spot ICE.”
    — Madison McVan (08:18)

---

4. After Renee Goode: Escalation and Shifting Tactics

[09:50–11:11]

• Impact of Goode’s Death:

  • The shooting has galvanized more residents to confront ICE, increasing volunteer patrols and public protests.
  • Activists reassess their personal risk but remain committed.

• ICE’s Framing vs. Local Views:

  • Federal officials portray activists as threats ("domestic terrorists"), while locals argue their tactics are a last resort to protect immigrant neighbors and disrupt what they see as an occupation.

  • Quotes:

    "I think the people on the ground here... feel that this is an occupied city and they want to show... they are unhappy with that."
    — Madison McVan (10:44)
    "This was an act of domestic terrorism." — Governor Kristi Noem (11:22)
    "This is classic terrorism... we're no longer going to enforce the law." — VP J.D. Vance (11:33)

---

5. Legal Limbo: Can ICE Be Held Accountable?

[16:54–26:28]

• Legal Analysis by Ian Millhiser (Vox):
  • Federal-State Investigation Breakdown:
    • State investigators were excluded from federal proceedings, raising doubts about transparency and accountability.
    • Six federal prosecutors resigned when pressured to focus on the victim's spouse.
    • State calls for cooperation and public submission of evidence reflect distrust of the federal process.
  • Federal Immunity for ICE Agents:
    • VP J.D. Vance asserted (falsely) that ICE agents have "absolute immunity."
    • Millhiser explains "absolute immunity" applies to sitting presidents, judges, and prosecutors—but not to ICE agents.
    • The doctrine from In re Neagle (1890) gives federal agents some protection if acting within the scope of their duties, but this protection is not absolute.
    • The recent Supreme Court case (Martin v. United States, 2025) weakened previous assumptions of federal immunity, leaving the law unsettled.
    • Quote:

      "He needs to go back to law school if he thinks that that's the appropriate term."
      — Ian Millhiser on VP Vance (21:13)

    “Protections for federal law enforcement officers against state prosecutions are not absolute.”
    — Ian Millhiser (22:56)

• If State Charges Proceed:
  • Unclear whether prosecution of ICE officer Jonathan Ross would be allowed, and any such case could reach the Supreme Court.
  • The Court’s ambiguous recent language means "necessary and proper” is subject to interpretation on both sides.
• Public Confidence in Law:
  • Listeners are left with the sense that ICE operates above the law, and that accountability for abuses is politically selective.
  • Quote:

    "There is, in fact, selective law enforcement in the Trump administration... the Justice Department is behaving in a political manner."
    — Ian Millhiser (26:28)

---

6. Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• "The idea is that if residents follow ICE and record them, that they can possibly prevent arrest from taking place at all."
  — Madison McVan (02:26)

• "This was an act of domestic terrorism."
  — Gov. Kristi Noem (11:22)

• "He needs to go back to law school if he thinks that's the appropriate term."
  — Ian Millhiser on J.D. Vance misusing 'absolute immunity' (21:13)

• "There is, in fact, selective law enforcement in the Trump administration."
  — Ian Millhiser (26:28)

---

7. Key Segments & Timestamps

• ICE observer patrols in action: 02:26–06:57
• Community organization origins and diversity: 07:07–09:50
• Changing tactics after Renee Goode's death: 09:50–11:11
• Legal process and immunity debates: 16:54–26:28

---

8. Conclusion

Today, Explained delivers a sharply focused look at a city in crisis, where law enforcement, political power, and community action collide. The episode highlights the blurry boundary between legal protest and “obstruction,” exposes the difficulties of holding federal agents accountable, and ends with a sobering recognition that, for many, the law no longer feels just or effective.

---

Transcript

[Noel King]

Some of this video coming out of Minneapolis is telling a story about the surge of ICE agents that started last week after Renee Goode was killed.

[Ian Millhiser]

Another controversial video has emerged of ice. This time the agents are making an arrest and it turns out the people being arrested were US Citizens.

[Noel King]

These are observers making sure that kids can walk home from school without being fucking taken apart by the fucking horrible Gestapo that we have here. A group of men approached a woman.

[Madison McVan]

At a bus stop, pulled her aside and then walked her into a vehicle.

[Noel King]

The polling is also telling a story. Support for ICE is dropping and more Americans than ever before 46% told economist YouGov pollsters they want ICE abolished. Meanwhile, the messaging from the White House is that ICE has immunity. So what does that mean for the people, some of them citizens, that ICE agents are dragging out of cars and workplaces and off of streets around Minneapolis? We have answers ahead on today, Explained.

[Ian Millhiser]

AI had the time of my life.

[Observer 1]

A I never felt this way before.

[Noel King]

From building timelines to assigning the right.

[Madison McVan]

People and even spotting risks across dozens of projects, Monday Sidekick knows your business, thinks ahead and takes action. One click on the star and consider it done.

[Ian Millhiser]

And I owe it all to you.

[Noel King]

Try Monday Sidekick AI you'll love to.

[Madison McVan]

Use on Monday.com New year, new me.

[Experian Advertiser]

Cute, but how about New Year, New Money? With Experian you can actually take control of your finances. Check your FICO score, find ways to save and get matched with credit card offers giving you time to power through those New Year's goals. You know you're gonna crush start the year off right. Download the Experian app based on FICO scoring model offers an approval not guaranteed. Eligibility requirements and terms apply subject to credit check, which may impact your credit scores. Offers not available in all states. See experian.com for details.

[Noel King]

Experian. This is today, explained Madison mcvan is a reporter at the Minnesota Reformer. She's been riding along with Minneapolis residents who are tailing ICE officers in their city to try and distract and disrupt enforcement. Madison what's that been like?

[Madison McVan]

It's been intense. The idea is that if residents follow ICE and record them, that they can possibly prevent arrest from taking place at all.

[Noel King]

And is it working?

[Madison McVan]

The people I rode along with think it is working. They basically say if we follow ICE and we record them, they're a lot less likely to get out of their cars and start asking people for their citizenship documentation and that kind of thing.

[Noel King]

Tell me what you've experienced when you've been in the car with these people.

[Madison McVan]

There's usually one person driving and then a second person manning the phones. And so the passenger is following along with a group chat. They're on a group call with other people in the neighborhood who are doing the same thing. So they can correspond about where they're seeing ICE and notify each other when someone finds ICE and starts following the vehicle.

[Observer 1]

Where are they?

[Ian Millhiser]

Where are they? They're in front of me. They're in front of me.

[Noel King]

Either I'm squeaking or that's.

[Madison McVan]

This kind of plays out a pattern that I've seen over and over now, which is that the observers start following an ICE vehicle. The ICE vehicle starts, you know, basically identifies themselves as federal officers by checking to see if they're being followed. They turn into a side street, or they do an aggressive maneuver, or they start weaving through parking lots, seeming to make sure they're being followed. And then at some point, they stop the vehicle. The observers stop behind them. The ICE agents get out of the car, surround the vehicle, and tell the observers to stop following them, that they're obstructing ICE operations, and that they may be arrested if they continue following.

[Ian Millhiser]

I did not follow.

[Observer 1]

So please be on your way and stop impeding or you will be arrested.

[Ian Millhiser]

You've been warned that you continue. Follow us, and you're breaking a lot of oh, no, no, no, no, no. Hell, no. No.

[Noel King]

We warned you, sir. Nope.

[Madison McVan]

When I was riding along with a pair of observers, they were following an ICE vehicle, and that exact thing happened. ICE officers got out of their vehicles. They surrounded the car, and one officer told the driver, stop following us or we'll arrest you. The observers decided to continue following the car, and the ICE vehicle drove straight to the address of one of the observers that was in the car. So it seemed like they were doing some kind of looking up of the identity of the person who owned the vehicle and then driving to their home address. The ICE vehicles stopped at the observer's home and then kept going. And so the observers decided to continue following the vehicles. Two of the vehicles in the convoy split up, and the observers decided to follow the third ICE car. As they were following that third ICE car, agents circled back to the observer's house that they had just stopped in front of and went and banged on the door. The observer's wife was home. She was terrified, and she pretended she wasn't home. And neighbors started coming out of their houses once they realized ICE was next door blowing whistles. Some people stopped and honked horns, and eventually the agents left. So we were planning on publishing this article about the ride along on Monday, I had a call scheduled with those two observers, Patti and Elle, on Sunday night to just tie up loose ends and do a fact check before publication. But Patti wasn't getting back to me, and she has an iPhone and I was texting her, and the texts were green. So I started thinking maybe something was off. I started looking around on social media, and I saw a video from several hours prior to that showed Patty getting her car window smashed in by an ICE agent, Stinger. She was pulled out of the car and handcuffed and taken to the Whipple Federal Building at Fort Snelling, which is where ICE is headquartered in the Twin Cities. Three ICE agents that were in the car with me immediately started taunting me. The driver of the car said, you guys gotta stop obstructing us. That's why that lesbian is dead. She did get released on Sunday night without charges, along with the other observer that had been in the car with her that day. So I went and met up with her on Monday and talked to her about her experience being held by ice. And then that became part of the story.

[Noel King]

Too much of the country was not paying attention to Minnesota before Renee Goode was killed by an ICE agent last week. Was this going on before that?

[Madison McVan]

There was an immigration enforcement surge starting in December. So that was when patrols really started ramping up. But even before that, people were organized in rapid response networks, starting when Trump took over for his second term. The idea behind the rapid response networks was that if we see an ICE action taking place, we can notify a bunch of people in the neighborhood and the neighbors can respond to film ICE to inform people of their rights and to protest. But with this big surge in ICE agents arriving, they've kind of changed tactics. It seems like now the ICE agents are traveling in smaller groups. They're conducting arrests quickly. They're really trying to get in and out before people have time to respond en masse and start protesting. So that's why the rapid response networks have shifted more towards a proactive approach, following ICE agents in hopes of preventing raids or arrests before they even happen.

[Noel King]

The Trump administration has suggested that the people doing this are organized activists who have, I don't know, possibly mendacious goals. You tell me about them, though.

[Ian Millhiser]

Who.

[Noel King]

Who are these people? How did they get organized?

[Madison McVan]

Well, I think this is where it's relevant to mention that Minneapolis police murdered George Floyd, you know, less than a mile from where an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Goode. So this neighborhood has been organized before. They've mobilized en masse against police brutality before. So I think that there's already a culture, particularly in the south side of Minneapolis, of organization and protest. The people who are doing this come from all walks of life. We're seeing churches get involved in this. We're seeing parents organize with people whose children go to the same schools so that they can be standing outside during dismissal, or so that they can escort immigrant parents when they're dropping off their children at school. It's people who have a lot of time and identify as activists. And it's also people who are commuting to work in the suburbs saying, let me take a different route today to see if I spot ice and I'll let you know if I see anything.

[Noel King]

Do you know if Renee Goode was one of these people?

[Madison McVan]

We don't know the details of her involvement in any of these networks. The people I talked to who lived in her neighborhood, who were involved in some of these rapid response groups, said they did not know her. But it's important to note that it's possible she could have been in the group and they wouldn't have known because everyone uses anonymous nicknames. So it's possible she was there using an anonymous nickname, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

[Noel King]

After Renee Goode was killed by the ICE agent, it has seemed like things in Minneapolis have become pretty chaotic. How have these people changed their tactics at all since she was killed? Are they doing anything differently?

[Madison McVan]

I think the killing of Renee Goode has really only strengthened the resolve of a lot of the people who are already involved in this, and it's driven more people to try to join the movement. I think a lot of people who are protesting ICE or who are going out on patrols are asking themselves what they are willing to risk for this movement, knowing that someone was shot while protesting ice.

[Noel King]

You're a journalist, so of course you're sort of looking at all sides of this debate in Minneapolis. What do you make of the argument from ICE agents that this is threatening, that people following them in cars feels like a threat and that it shouldn't be happening?

[Madison McVan]

Well, I think that's part of the point. I think the people on the ground here, many of them feel that this is an occupied city and they want to show that they are unhappy with that. They want to try to disrupt ICE operations within the bounds of the law to protect their immigrant neighbors. That's how they see it. So I'm not surprised that ICE agents feel threatened by this. I think that's part of the goal.

[Noel King]

That's very interesting because as you know, the Trump administration has tried to paint Renee Goode and others like her and as a danger to the city itself. Kristi Noem called Renee Goode a domestic terrorist.

[Madison McVan]

This was an act of domestic terrorism.

[Noel King]

This vehicle was used to hit this officer. It was used as a weapon. Vice President J.D. vance has called this classic terrorism.

[Vice President J.D. Vance]

This is classic terrorism. And we cannot say that when, when, when a far left fringe is inciting violence against our brave law enforcement officials that we're no longer going to enforce the law.

[Noel King]

How do you make sense of statements like that based on what you're seeing and the activists who are doing this kind of work?

[Madison McVan]

I think it's important to remember that at least the activists I've been with are committed to doing this within the bounds of the law. So it's really this gray area between what's considered obstruction in a legal sense and what is practically obstruction of ICE's work. You know, honking horns and following them is not physically blocking them from making an arrest, but it certainly discourages them from doing so. So that's kind of where a lot of the action is happening. And when it comes to Renee Goode, it's unclear what exactly her involvement may have been in any kind of organized movement to protest. But I think what her actions show is that the people of Minneapolis, collectively, at least most of them, it feels like, have decided that when they see ice, they're taking action in whatever form feels right for them.

[Noel King]

That was Madison mcvan. She's a reporter with the Minnesota Reformer. Coming up, does the long arm of the law reach ice? Support for Today Explained comes from Vanta. Vanta says if you run a business, you know how important it is to keep your customers trust. Frankly, says Vanta, maintaining that trust can make or break your business. Makes sense. But the more your business grows ads Vanta, the more complex your security and compliance tools can get. And left unchecked, Vanta ads that can turn into business chaos. And furthermore, chaos isn't exactly something that customers trust, nor is it a great security strategy. That's where Vanta comes in, says Vanta. Vanta says you can think of them as your always on AI powered security expert who can scale with you. How do they do that? She asks. Vanta says they can automate compliance, continuously monitor your control, and let you look at your entire compliance and risk ecosystem from one place so you can see the whole picture. Perhaps you're a fast growing startup like Cursor. Perhaps you're an enterprise like something called Snowflake. Vanta says they can fit into your existing workflows. You can stop spending so much time worrying about compliance and instead focus on your customers. You can get [e-mail] explained. That's V A N T A dot com explained Vanna.com explained. Support for Today Explained comes from Upwork. Just because you started a business doesn't mean you have to do it all, says Upwork. Upwork says Upwork can help take some of that work off your frail shoulders so you can finally delegate with confidence. Upwork says that with Upwork Business plus they can help you find top quality freelancers fast. It can give you instant access to the top 1% of talent on Upwork in fields such as marketing, design, AI, so much more, all ready to jump in and work for you. And Upwork says that with Upwork Business plus, instead of spending weeks sorting through so many resumes, you can source and vet a curated shortlist of proven candidates for skills and reliability. That way you're never stuck spinning your wheels when you need a skilled pro and your projects stay on track. You can visit Upwork.com or right now to post your job for free and connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's Upwork.com Upwork.com.

[Observer 1]

Support for this show comes from Shopify. As the year ends, everyone is bold with their New Year's resolutions. But as January starts, the goals you set for yourself can seem more and more difficult. If Your goal for 2026 was to start a new business, Shopify says they can help make that happen for you. With all the tools you need to easily build your dream store. Choose from hundreds of beautiful templates that you can customize to match your brand. Setup is fast with Shopify's built in AI tools that help write product descriptions and headlines and can help you edit product photos. Marketing is built in too. Create email and social campaigns that reach customers wherever they scroll. As you grow, Shopify grows with you. Handle more orders, expand to new markets and do it all from the same dashboard. In 2026, stop waiting and start selling. With Shopify. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at shopify.com explained. Go to shopify.com explained that shopify.com explained Hear your first this year with Shopify by your side.

[Noel King]

This is today, explained Ian Millhiser. You cover the Supreme Court for Vox. A woman in Minnesota is dead and there is video of her killing at the hands of an ICE agent. The first response from many thinking Americans was there will be a legal way of dealing with what happened here. There will be accountability. Why is that our response?

[Ian Millhiser]

The whole point of legal accountability is to deter people from doing bad things. You know, this isn't the only reason I don't break into my neighbor's home, but one reason I don't break into my neighbor's home is I know that if I do, I will be arrested, you know, or for that matter, like, they recently put a speeding camera on the road outside my home. I drive slower now. And the reason why is because I know that if I scooch over the speed limit, that camera is going to catch me and I will face consequences for legal consequences for. For it. And this is a question that the Supreme Court has been wrestling with for quite some time is when do we want law enforcement officers to feel like if they behave bad, they will fear legal consequences?

[Noel King]

All right, let's talk about the investigation in Minneapolis. What do we know at this point?

[Ian Millhiser]

We know it's pretty splintered. So normally the way something like this would work is that federal law enforcement officers would work with the state police in order to determine what happened and if any criminal charges need to be brought. There are several reasons why the federal investigation is looking like it's not serious. One is that they appear to have kicked the state police out of the investigation. The state is no longer allowed to cooperate with the federal government. The federal government apparently is not sharing information with state police, and that's a big red flag. On top of that, the deputy Attorney general, Todd Blanch, said that he doesn't think a civil rights investigation into the shooting itself is warranted. And on top of that, six prosecutors in the U.S. attorney's office in Minnesota resigned in protest because apparently the US Attorney wanted the investigation to focus on Becca Good, the wife of the victim. So, you know, it really looks like this federal investigation is not just a sham, but potentially something worse because they may be looking to harass the widow here. And that leaves open the question of whether the state government is able. Is going to be able to conduct a thorough investigation investigation without federal cooperation.

[Madison McVan]

We call on the FBI to share the. To share the. The evidence with the Force Investigations Unit at the BCA and have this be a legitimate and trusted investigation.

[Ian Millhiser]

Minnesota itself seems to be, you know, indicating that it wants to conduct an investigation. They have requested that people who have.

[Madison McVan]

Information or who have video or photos of the event to submit that information to our office.

[Ian Millhiser]

But it's unclear just how effective the state's investigation is going to be if the feds will not cooperate. So we have two investigations, one which of which may not be a serious investigation, and the other one may be state police, you know, trying to investigate with both. Both arms tied behind their backs.

[Noel King]

Talk about what we are hearing from the federal government. So Vice President J.D. vance, who has a law degree from Yale, if I'm not mistaken, said an astonishing amount before an investigation had even begun here.

[Vice President J.D. Vance]

I can believe that her death is a tragedy while also recognizing that it's a tragedy of her own making and a tragedy of the far left who has marshaled an entire movement, a lunatic fringe, against our law enforcement.

[Noel King]

But he has been very clear that the ICE agent involved, Jonathan Ross, has absolute immunity.

[Vice President J.D. Vance]

That guy is protected by absolute immunity. He was doing his job.

[Noel King]

What does the Vice President mean? I mean.

[Ian Millhiser]

He needs to go back to law school if he thinks that that's the appropriate term. So absolute immunity is a term that is used in civil lawsuits, so not in criminal investigation, like when you have a private party suing another person, typically for money. The Supreme Court has said that three classes of individuals have absolute immunity from those suits. None of them are law enforcement. Those three. Those three classes of individuals are the sitting president, judges and prosecutors. Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who shot Renee Good, is neither the President of the United States, a judge, or a prosecutor. So absolute immunity doesn't. Does not apply to him. There are some doctrines that apply to criminal investigations. Probably the most important one is a doctrine that emerges from a case called in Reneagle a. It's an 1890 case, so this is really old, and it involves a federal law enforcement officer who shot a man in the course of duty. The state of California wanted to prosecute him. And Neagle set the rule that in most, but not all cases, when a federal law enforcement officer is acting within the scope of their duties, the state cannot prosecute them.

[Noel King]

Okay, so that means that this officer, even though the vice president was not using the right words, he may have been saying the right thing because this guy is a federal officer. This precedent that's been around since 1890 probably protects him. What, unless somebody on the federal end decides to bring criminal charges?

[Ian Millhiser]

Well, so the short answer to that is that it's unclear because about six months ago last June, the Supreme Court handed down another case called Martin v. United States, where they said that Neagle is. It's certainly weaker than I used to think it was. You know, they weakened Negle somewhat. What I get out of Martin is that protections for federal law enforcement officers against state prosecutions are not absolute. So they are not what JD Vance said they are, even though there is still some protection there.

[Noel King]

All right, so the Supreme Court within the last year is telegraphing something different than it was in 1890 and in the years that followed. Is there a chance in your mind that this case ends up in some fashion before the Supreme Court?

[Ian Millhiser]

I think that if the state of Minnesota prosecutes and that that's a big if here, because first of all, we don't know if they're going to be able to conduct a thorough investigation given the federal sabotage. And second of all, you know, we don't know what the results of that investigation would be. Maybe they determine that they can't bring a successful prosecution here. Even if Jonathan Ross is guilty, the prosecutors still have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. And so they may determine that they just don't have enough evidence that it's worth going to a jury. But if they bring a prosecution, I think that the state of the law governing when a state can bring a prosecution against a federal officer is very unclear right now. And this, you know, especially given how high profile this case is, this is the sort of case that I could easily see winding up in front of the Supreme Court.

[Noel King]

If Minnesota state prosecutors are able to bring charges against this man, what does that mean for the way that ICE behaves in the streets next month, six months from now, a year from now?

[Ian Millhiser]

So the short answer, I think it depends a lot on what the courts say. What the Supreme Court said recently in Martin, though, is they essentially said that, well, we only want negle to apply when we know that this officer is actually carrying out federal duties. Federal officers may sometimes defeat state prosecutions against them by demonstrating that their actions.

[Observer 1]

Though criminal under state law, were necessary.

[Ian Millhiser]

And proper in the discharge of their federal responsibilities. All that I have to say about that language is, you know, I'm a good enough lawyer that, you know, if I was a Minnesota state prosecutor, I could argue that shooting someone when they had their wheels turned against you and they weren't a threat to you is not, you know, necessary and proper the discharge of federal law enforcement, and therefore prosecution should be allowed. And if I were Jonathan Ross's attorney, I could argue the opposite. Like, that's really vague language that the Supreme Court handed down in Martin. And so I. I don't know what the correct answer is to the question of whether or not Ross can be prosecuted in state court, because the only thing I've got to work with is this extraordinarily vague line from the Supreme Court about, you know, things that are necessary and proper to federal responsibilities.

[Noel King]

What do you make of the fact, as somebody who is a lawyer and who has covered the law for a long time, what do you make of the fact that a lot of Americans are feeling right now that the law does not work, that a woman is dead, that ICE is dragging people off the streets in some cases violently, and the law does not seem to apply to those people?

[Ian Millhiser]

Yeah, no, I mean, they are correct that there is, in fact, selective law enforcement in the Trump administration. You know, Trump had a very different reaction to the January six offenders, some of which endangered federal law enforcement officers office a whole lot more than Renee Good did. So, yeah, I mean, there's no question here that the Justice Department is behaving in a political manner. And it, and it's a serious problem. Like, you know, for many, many years, there were very strong norms saying that even though the Justice Department is part of a presidential administration, prosecutorial decisions should be made by civil servants for neutral legal reasons and not for political reasons. And that norm has just completely broken down under this president.

[Noel King]

Ian Millhiser. He covers the Supreme Court and the law for vox. Danielle Hewitt and Arianna Espudu produced today. Amina Elsadi was our editor. Patrick Boyd and David Tadashore are our engineers. Andrea Lopez Cruzado is our fact checker. I'm Noel King. It's TODAY explained.