+- Hack Forums (https://hackforums.net)
+-- Forum: General Topics (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: World (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=445)
+---- Forum: News and Happenings (https://hackforums.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=89)
+---- Thread: NY Times questions ICE's stop of Renee Good - Potentially unlawful (/showthread.php?tid=6317956)
NY Times questions ICE's stop of Renee Good - Potentially unlawful - Hackers - Jan 17, 2026
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/15/us/renee-good-ice-agent-comply-legal.html
Quote:“What were the ICE officers even attempting to do?” asked Rachel Moran, an expert on police accountability at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in Minneapolis. “There’s a couple of key questions, I think. One is, were they involved in a legitimate enforcement operation at that point? And the second is, was she actually blocking their vehicles?”
That's important. The law states that ICE can make arrests if they are performing official duties and they are prevented from doing so. Video shows that they were not prevented from driving on the road, while their current task was to drive down the road to headquarters.
NY Times and thousands of lawyers across the country are rallying behind this question. Did ICE have legal authority to stop Renee Good in that moment? It is extremely possible that they did not.
Quote:Video of the episode shows that Ms. Good’s Honda was blocking at least one lane of traffic, but cars were able to pass.
That raises the question, experts said, of whether the agent who asked Ms. Good to exit her car was performing what amounts to traffic enforcement, a function of the local police.
This part is EXTREMELY important:
Quote:Michael Feinberg, a lawyer and former F.B.I. agent, wrote that according to Minnesota statute, peace officers, defined as state or local law enforcement officers, are empowered to enforce the law against stopping on a road or highway, a misdemeanor.
Federal agents may serve as peace officers only at the request and under the direction of a state or local officer.
For example, if it is found that ICE was not prevented from their current task (to return to headquarters), then they would no longer have the authority to arrest or apprehend Renee Good, unless they are requested to assist with local / state traffic enforcement by a state or local officer.
I don't make the laws, so please don't attempt to flame me or "debunk me". I'm just quoting & referencing the lawyers, like I always have for years now when it comes to what some people call "politics".
Quote:If Ms. Good was violating traffic laws in a way that did not interfere with federal agents’ work, one option would be to call for help from the local police.
Correct. Her violating traffic laws, but leaving a lane open would lead to the argument that ICE's only lawful action is to call local police, and only engage Renee Good at their request.
Again, I don't make the fucking laws here.
And lastly, NY Times mentions this other key aspect. Videos and witness testimony supports that Renee Good was directed to leave immediately, AND told to exit the vehicle. Which one is the correct instruction? With two different officers giving two different instructions, who is to say.
Quote:Situations where officers give conflicting instructions can be particularly thorny, he said. One witness reported that Ms. Good was ordered to leave the scene before being told to get out of her S.U.V. “Had she stayed there, maybe the guy who told her to get out of there would have been upset with her,” Mr. Alpert said.
Lastly from me... Lets remember the US Constitution and amendments. It trumps all executive orders, directives, and opinions. Remember these few amendments, they are necessary to a free and great country:
1A
Quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
2A
Quote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
4A
Quote:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This one's important. The federal government does not have power to overrule the Constitution, and specifically ANY AND ALL powers not specifically granted are reserved automatically for the State & the people:
10A
Quote:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
When dealing with an unlawful stop, detainment, search, seizure, or arrest, it is important to prioritize your safety. If approached by ICE or other federal agents, attempt to comply even if they are violating your Constitutional rights. It is important to preserve your safety, and then retain a lawyer to assist with the rights violation.
I am sharing this thread because it is absolutely vital to take the politics out of it. I do not give a single fuck who is involved. If Renee Good did not truly prevent ICE from leaving (because their only active task was to drive to HQ), then ICE did not have legal authority to stop & arrest her.
This does not erase what happened after. Whether or not Jonathan Ross' life was in danger is a completely separate matter.
It is absolutely possible that Renee Good's rights were violated by ICE committing an illegal act, and giving her unlawful orders, prior to the events that unfolded.
If we have any chance in this country, it is to study the laws, respect the laws, and investigate the events. If that's "politics" to some of you, then perhaps that's the problem. I will respond to anyone who is interested in discussing facts & laws in a bipartisan, fair, transparent, and factual manner. I am not going to respond to people who pretend that ICE has unilateral authority in every single situation because that's not what the law says, and it is easily verifiable.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Know your rights, and always treat others with respect and speak noicely.