The Democrat Insurrection has found a new home. Last year it was primarily in California. As 2026 begins, the Democrat Insurrection is in full flower in Minnesota.
Any quaint notion that these would be “peaceful” protests ended on January 7, when Renee Good decided to point her vehicle at an ICE agent and stomp on the accelerator. The ICE agent naturally responded by drawing his weapon and firing, killing Ms. Good.
Corporate media wants to pretend that use of force by ICE agents is somehow improper, even as it concedes that those “protesting” ICE activities are escalating to violence (emphasis mine).
As news of the shooting spread in Minneapolis on Wednesday, protesters gathered at the scene, yelling at immigration agents and throwing snowballs, according to live stream footage. The footage showed ICE agents responding with tear gas. Bovino was also at the scene, according to news reports.
“Throwing snowballs” at ICE agents is an attack upon those ICE agents. It is an assault, and potentially a dangerous one: body heat from one’s hands can turn a packed snowball into a much more solid block of ice, capable of causing injury.
Assaulting federal law enforcement agents—which includes ICE—is a federal crime1.
When law enforcement agents are attacked, they are going to respond with various levels of force, which can include the use of tear gas and other means of riot control.
When people attack ICE agents, even with snowballs, they are not protesting. They are rioting. When they continue to riot it becomes an uprising, an insurrection.
That is where we are now—in an insurrection. It is where we have been since last summer. Minneapolis is merely an extension of what erupted in Los Angeles last year.
The insurrection is spreading, steadily becoming a new Civil War in this country.
Now, as then, this is the demonstrable handiwork of Democrats. With words and with violence they are seeking to prevent ICE agents from doing their jobs.
Now, as then, this is a Democrat-led insurrection.
Now, as then, it must be stopped.
ICE Agents Are Being Targeted
The violence in Minneapolis is part of an ongoing pattern of escalating violence directed specifically against ICE agents, not just in Minnesota, but across the country.
Last September, illegal alien Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez was shot and killed when he attempted to run over ICE agents in Chicago. Sadly but not surprisingly, corporate media downplayed the injuries to the ICE agents, as if being struck by a car was of little or no consequence.
But videos collected from nearby businesses and bystanders show both officers engaged in tactics that experts in policing said put them at unnecessary risk. Video also shows the hurt officer was fully mobile after the shooting and described his injuries as “nothing major.” And while DHS has said it is targeting the “worst of the worst,” records from Chicago’s Cook County show Villegas-Gonzalez had no record of violence. Since illegally crossing the border nearly two decades ago, he had been charged only with traffic violations in the city where he settled.
Perversely, even corporate media has had to acknowledge some awkward facts which dismantle their “ICE is bad” narrative:
An ICE agent was hurt.
Villegas-Gonzalez did strike the ICE agent with his vehicle.
Villegas-Gonzalez did enter the US illegally, meaning he was an illegal alien.
Similarly, when Renee Good and her partner decided to escalate matters with ICE agents in Minneapolis, the agent’s body cam video footage shows that Ms. Good was using her car to block traffic and impede an ICE operation, that Ms. Good’s partner verbally taunted a number of ICE agents who stepped out to confront the pair, then egged on Renee Good to disobey an ICE agent who ordered her out of the car, who then attempted to drive away by pointing her car at an ICE agent and stomping on the gas.
We do not need to ponder what actually happened. We have video evidence documenting what happened.
The POV footage shows Good’s romantic partner talking trash to the ICE agent as he approached her wife’s SUV.
“You wanna come at us?” Good’s partner said taunting the ICE agent. “I say go get yourself some lunch big boy.”
“Get out of the f*cking car!” an ICE agent said as he tried to open Good’s door.
Good accelerates her vehicle as her partner shouted, “Drive, baby! Drive!”
When Good accelerated, the officer fired multiple times, killing Renee Good.
I will digress to highlight an important point: Renee Good threatened an ICE agent with her vehicle, and the ICE agent responded with his firearm. There is no debate that accelerating a car towards a person on foot—which is what Renee Good indisputably did—represents lethal force. We only have to look at the statistics to see that cars are considerably more lethal in this country than firearms:
For all of 2025, there were an estimated 32,220 vehicular deaths in the United States, and in 2024 there were an estimated 39,345 vehicular deaths.
In 2025, there were an estimated 14,651 gun-related deaths not counting suicides. In 2024 there were an estimated 16,888 gun-related deaths.
When Renee Good accelerated her car towards an ICE agent, she was threatening his life. Any presentation of what happened which denies that is either dishonest or delusional.
By the same token, when Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez drove at and struck ICE agents, he was threatening their lives. Any presentation of what happened which denies that is either dishonest or delusional.
These individuals targeted ICE agents with lethal force, and we must presume with deadly intent. There may not have been premeditation, but the moment they stepped on the gas intent was demonstrated.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with how ICE conducts its immigration enforcement actions, or even that ICE is conducting immigration enforcement actions, there neither legal nor moral justification for targeting them with lethal force. Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez was wrong to do so. Renee Good was wrong to do so.
Period.
End of Sentence.
End of Discussion.
Officials Are Lying—Again
We should not be surprised that the execrable and thoroughly repugnant Ilhan Omar took to X in the wake of Renee Good’s death to construct her usual maliciously false narrative about events, accusing ICE of “terrorizing” Minneapolis.
There was nothing “legal” about Renee Good obstructing traffic to frustrate ICE activities. That’s not “observation”, that’s "interference”—which for a civilian to do when law enforcement is doing its job is a criminal act.
Again, 18 USC §115 makes it a crime to assault or threaten to assault a law enforcement officer. The video footage is unequivocal on this point: Renee Good assaulted an ICE agent. Renee Good threatened an ICE agent with deadly force. To assert otherwise is either dishonest or delusional—or, in the case of Ilhan Omar, both.
She is not alone in her deceit, however. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey also lashed out in public, fatuously dismissing any notion that the ICE agents acted either with justification or in self-defense.
Frey disputed those claims at the press conference, saying videos show the woman driving away from federal agents, not toward them.
“They are already trying to spin this as an action of self-defense,” Frey said. “Having seen the video myself, I want to tell everybody directly that is bull----.”
The bodycam footage, of course, makes it abundantly clear that Jacob Frey is the one peddling hogwash and horse hockey. He’s simply lying when he says the ICE agent did not act in self defense.
Disgraced Minnesota Governor Tim Walz also added his deceitful two cents, claiming quite falsely, that DHS claims of justification and self-defense were “verifiably inaccurate.”
Walz publicly demanded that the state be allowed to take part, repeatedly emphasizing that it would be “very, very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation that excludes the state could be fair.
Noem, he said, was “judge, jury and basically executioner” during her public comments defending the officer’s actions.
“People in positions of power have already passed judgment, from the president to the vice president to Kristi Noem — have stood and told you things that are verifiably false, verifiably inaccurate,” said Walz, who repeated his calls for protesters to remain calm.
However, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s official statement on January 7 comports entirely with the facts presented in the video footage.
While the conclusion of DHS that Renee Good’s actions amounted to an act of domestic terrorism is a legal conclusion, and may therefore be subject to some debate, there can be no debate that Renee Good intentionally impeded ICE agents in the performance of their duty—which is a crime—and intentionally drove her vehicle at an ICE agent—which is also a crime. When someone accelerates their vehicle at another human being, the intent to kill or cause bodily harm is naturally assumed, in large measure because of the number of times cars are involved in human deaths each year.
All of these Minnesota public officials are simply lying when they make Renee Good to be a victim of ICE excess or ICE brutality.
If Renee Good did not choose to commit criminal acts, she would be alive today. There is no serious debate to be had on this point. Anyone pretending that Renee Good is a victim of anything other than her own very bad choices is not being honest about this event.
Democrats Are Encouraging The Violence
One person making bad choices is an unfortunate tragedy. However, Renee Good is not merely one person making bad choices. She was a person doing what Democrat elected officials have praised and openly encouraged for going on one year.
We must remember that last January, as Donald Trump was taking office, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries publicly called for people to fight the Administration “in the streets”.
Renee Good and her partner Rebecca were indisputably doing just that on January 7. That much is evident from Rebecca Good’s recorded comments at the time, and from her own later admission that she encouraged Renee to come to Minneapolis to participate in “protests”.
Rebecca was then seen distraught and apparently crying that she’d been the one who asked her wife to go out and protest the ICE operations.
“I made her come down here; it’s my fault,” Rebecca said, her face covered in blood after having attempted to help Renee. “They just shot my wife.”
“They shot her in the head. I have a 6-year-old in school,” Rebecca said.
Unfortunately for Renee Good, taunting ICE agents in the middle of doing their jobs, as Rebecca indisputably did, is not “protesting”, it’s interfering.
Blocking the road, as Renee Good indisputably did, is not “protesting”, it’s interfering.
Accelerating at an ICE agent, as Renee Good indisputably did, is not “protesting”, it’s attempted vehicular manslaughter.
Were they answering calls like that of Hakeem Jeffries to “fight in the streets”?
Last May, during a commencement address at the University of Minnesota, Tim Walz referred to ICE as “Trump’s modern-day Gestapo”.
Last July, Democrat Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal said it was “inspiring” to see people obstructing ICE immigration enforcement.
“Some of the most inspiring things have been when people encircle courtrooms and refuse to allow ICE agents in,” Jayapal said during a conversation with Joy Reid on Friday’s episode of “The Joy Reid Show.”
She may find it inspiring, but she surely is aware that such actions are also illegal, and for her publicly praise criminality is indisputably tantamount to sedition, especially when coupled with rhetoric calling ICE a “terrorist force”.
It is not hard to draw a correlation between such rhetoric and the 700% increase in assaults on ICE agents during the first six months of last year. When Congresswoman Jayapal claims such assaults are “inspiring”, the linkage is an easy inference to make.
Such inferences are made even easier when we read about attacks on ICE facilities around the country, such as happened last July in Alvarado, Texas, McAllen, Texas, and Portland, Oregon.
Such inferences were virtually proven last June when, in the wake of the insurrection in California, Democrat affiliates sought to organize and spread the insurrection beyond California, with the participation of Democrat officials like Congresswoman Prayapal.
Not for nothing did I say at the time that this was a Democrat insurrection.
It was and it is a Democrat insurrection.
This Absolutely Is Insurrection
Nor is there any more question that what is taking place in Minneapolis is an insurrection just as it was in California. The law2 is quite clear on this point:
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
For an entire year, Democrats have been inciting and participating in violent opposition to the authority of the United States.
The legal context for Minnesota is no different than it was in California.
This is going to come as a shock to the rebels without a clue in California, but if you aren’t “authorized” you shouldn’t be here. The Constitution says as much, as it tasks Congress with regulating both foreign commerce and the process of naturalization.
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
In other words, the Constitution explicitly removes any notion that any non-citizen has an inalienable right to enter into this country. There is no debate to be had on the point.
Consequently, if you are not “authorized”—if you are in this country illegally—it is the duty of Immigration and Customs Enforcement to apprehend you and deport you. This is exactly what ICE has been doing. This is exactly what people turned out ostensibly to “protest” but really to violently obstruct.
Even corporate media concedes that detaining illegal aliens is what ICE has been doing, having apprehended some 75,000 persons by the beginning of December 2025.
When ICE is detaining illegal aliens, it is enforcing federal immigration law.
Nor is there any doubt that, while states do retain certain interests surrounding immigration, the federal government bears primary responsibility for enforcing immigration law. That was made clear in 2012’s immigration enforcement case Arizona v. United States3. In that ruling, the Supreme Court overturned part of an Arizona statute which sought to expand on federal immigration laws, an expansion the Court found to be an unconstitutional violation of the federalism doctrine of preemption.
State law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, the States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress, acting within its proper authority, has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U.S. 88, 115 (1992). The intent to displace state law altogether can be inferred from a framework of regulation “so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it” or where there is a “federal interest . . . so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject.” Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230 (1947); see English v. General Elec. Co., 496 U.S. 72, 79 (1990).
Second, state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law. Crosby, supra, at 372. This includes cases where “compliance with both federal and state regulations is a physical impossibility,” Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142–143 (1963), and those instances where the challenged state law “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress,” Hines, 312 U. S., at 67; see also Crosby, supra, at 373 (“What is a sufficient obstacle is a matter of judgment, to be informed by examining the federal statute as a whole and identifying its purpose and intended effects”). In preemption analysis, courts should assume that “the historic police powers of the States” are not superseded “unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.” Rice, supra, at 230; see Wyeth v. Levine, 555 U.S. 555, 565 (2009).
The Court held that immigration regulation was wholly a matter of federal jurisdiction, and that while states may have ancillary interests in minimizing crime and other issues, the core regulatory interest itself remains entirely within the purview of the federal government.
There is perverse irony that the Arizona statute at the center of that case was one passed largely because of perceived federal inaction on immigration, and the ruling itself achieved new prominence in 2024 when the Court vacated an injunction sought by the federal government blocking Texas Governor Greg Abbott from taking independent steps to secure Texas’ border with Mexico.
However, the Court’s stance in both cases was unambiguous: the federal government has primary responsibility on immigration enforcement.
Democrats are pretending that the federal government has no authority on immigration, a stance which is not only Constitutionally absurd but which is a blatant defiance of unequivocal Supreme Court precedent.
Democrats are denying the explicit letter of the Law. Democrats are denying the reality of the law.
Even if some Democrats are not explicitly advocating violence, their rhetoric is unambiguously aimed at thwarting and de-legitimizing federal immigration enforcement. If by some magic certain Democrats are not guilty of insurrection, it is only because they are instead guilty of seditious conspiracy4, a related but slightly different federal crime.
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
At a minimum, Democrats are attempting to delay indefinitely the execution of immigration laws in the United States.
Democrats, in both rhetoric and action, are in open defiance of the federal government—and the technical term for that is either “insurrection” or “seditious conspiracy”, both of which are indisputably federal crimes.
Does Welfare Fraud Factor Into This?
In Minnesota, the impetus to detain and deport illegal aliens has the additional incentive of confronting that state’s metastasizing welfare fraud scandal, which is centered around the state’s large Somali population. The day before Renee Good’s death, DHS announced that it had initiated “the largest DHS operation ever”, which was ongoing when Renee Good was killed.
So egregious is the Minnesota fraud scandal that independent journalist Nick Shirley took only a single day last month to uncover over $100 million in potential and alleged welfare fraud just going around and knocking on doors of Minneapolis Somali-run daycare centers.
Do Minnesota officials have reason to fear the DHS enforcement operation because of possible involvement in the billion-dollar fraud scandal?
That is at least a possibility, as allegations were raised on social media last month that officials from Tim Walz on down are culpable
Writing on X, an account claiming to represent 480 staff at the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) said the governor, who served as former vice president Kamala Harris’ running mate in 2024, “has failed Minnesota.” In another post, they added: “Tim Walz is 100% responsible for massive fraud in Minnesota.”
Last week, the Justice Department announced new charges against the 78th defendant in a scheme called Feeding Our Future. Prosecutors said the scheme involved more than $250 million in stolen funds from a child nutrition program and has led to over 50 convictions. According to a New York Times report, some of these schemes were linked to parts of Minnesota’s Somali community.
While the evidences of the 480 presumed Minnesota DHS whistleblowers remains undisclosed, the size and scope of Somali-related welfare fraud has been steadily expanding.
We cannot immediately conclude that Tim Walz or Jacob Frey’s opposition to DHS is due to involvement in the fraud scandal, but if either of them are involved, they have a demonstrable self-interest in frustrating the DHS operation, and DHS investigations into the immigration status of Minnesota’s Somalis in general.
Violence Is Not Free Speech. Insurrection Is Not Protest
It is, at this juncture, almost tautologous to say that America is divided on the topic of immigration. There are differing views about how aggressive the federal government should be in enforcing immigration law.
To a degree, those differing view are a sign of a healthy democracy. We should have different opinions about things and we should embrace that we have different opinions about things.
Yet there are certain realities about which there is simply no room for alternative opinions.
There can be no dispute that the Constitution explicitly reserves to the Congress the authority to enact immigration legislation. Whether we agree or disagree with the substance of the laws Congress has enacted, that the Constitution delegates that power to the Congress is unambiguous fact. There is no right reserved to the states where immigration itself is concerned.
There can be no dispute that the Supreme Court has ruled more than once on this point, each time affirming that immigration regulation lies with the federal government in its entirety.
There can be no dispute that the Executive Branch, of which ICE is but a part, is the sole branch charged with enforcing immigration legislation.
There can be no dispute that actively working to impede or frustrate federal law enforcement, is when pursued on a broad scale, insurrection.
There can be no dispute that speaking or making comments on social media specifically calibrated to incite a resurrection is the epitome of seditious conspiracy.
There is not room for debate over what Democrats are actually doing. They are not having a debate over immigration. They are not attempting to engage in a debate over immigration. They are attempting to demonize and polarize the federal government into belated compliance with their ideological talking points.
However, 77 million people last fall rejected Democratic ideological talking points about immigration. They voted for mass deportations. They voted for securing the border and stopping the flow of illegal aliens into this country.
Whether those policies are in the actual interest of the United States is the stuff of which political platforms are made.
If all Democrats were doing was protesting peacefully, we would not have a problem.
If all Democrats were doing was observing ICE raids, recording them—not “doxxing” the participants, just recording—and genuinely being “legal observers”, we would not have a problem.
However, we do have a problem.
Democrats are not protesting peacefully.
Democrats are encouraging violence.
Democrats are inciting violence.
Democrats are spreading violence.
Democrats are guilty of insurrection in Minnesota.
This insurrection must be stopped, and stopped now. Failure to do so only ensures that the new Civil War will continue to spread. That will cost Americans their safety, and will cost some people their lives.
The Democrat Insurrection must be put down.
Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012)
Bravo, Peter, for making the legalities of this horrendous situation crystal-clear!
I want the Trump administration to uncover and prove who, exactly, is funding organizations such as ICE watch. I want to see those organizations served with the appropriate indictments. I want the American people educated regarding who is guilty of seditious behavior and insurrection.
Many of the paid protesters have been misinformed about the legality of their actions. Some are going to be very surprised when they are sentenced to ten years in prison. Most of the other protesters are just college-aged youths who want to be part of something exciting. Their educational system has failed them, as they clearly don’t realize that they are NOT standing up for “justice” - they are committing federal crimes!
Thank you once again, Peter, for your highly knowledgeable attempts to educate people. I pray that some people read your posts before they destroy their futures!
Interesting according the definition they "DO NOT INTERVENE" Hmm
"Legal observers are trained volunteers who attend protests, demonstrations, and public events to monitor and document interactions between law enforcement and protesters. Their primary role is to serve as independent, neutral witnesses to ensure accountability by recording any instances of police misconduct, excessive force, unlawful arrests, or violations of civil rights.
They do not participate in the protest, intervene in events, or provide legal advice. Instead, legal observers document actions using notes, photos, video, and audio, often wearing identifiable gear like neon green hats (NLG) or orange hi-viz vests (Green and Black Cross)."