United States – As federal agents kill U.S. citizens during immigration enforcement actions without triggering federal investigations, critics say the question is no longer about misconduct — it is about authority, silence, and history.
Republicans currently control the executive branch and federal enforcement agencies. In that role, critics argue, the party now bears direct responsibility for what is done — and what is deliberately not done.
Within weeks, two U.S. citizens were killed by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis.
On January 7, 2026, ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, during an immigration raid. The administration claimed she “weaponized her vehicle.” Bystander video showed her driving away when shots were fired. The Justice Department did not open a criminal investigation.
On January 24, federal agents killed Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse, during protests against immigration enforcement. The Hennepin County Medical Examiner ruled his death a homicide due to multiple gunshot wounds, according to People.com. The Department of Homeland Security claimed Pretti approached officers with a firearm, a claim contradicted by New York Times video analysis, which showed Pretti holding a phone with both hands visible. No weapon is visible.
Again, no federal investigation followed.
For civil rights advocates, this pattern — lethal force followed by institutional silence — is not accidental.
“This is how authority signals permission,” said one constitutional scholar. “When power refuses to investigate itself, violence becomes normalized.”
Why Critics Are Invoking 1930s Germany
In recent days, historians and legal scholars have begun drawing explicit comparisons to 1930s Germany, where state-aligned paramilitary forces — most notably the Sturmabteilung (SA), or Brownshirts — were used to suppress dissent while political leadership claimed plausible deniability.
The comparison is not about ideology, scholars emphasize — but about structure and function.
In Germany, the Brownshirts operated with:
- State tolerance
- Legal immunity
- Political backing through silence
- Targeting of political opponents and marginalized communities
Violence was framed as “restoring order.” Investigations were rare. Courts deferred. Political leaders avoided direct responsibility while benefiting from intimidation.
Critics argue the modern U.S. parallel lies in federal agents acting with lethal authority, party leadership refusing oversight, and information pathways collapsing, limiting public scrutiny.
“This is the danger zone in any democracy,” said one historian of authoritarian movements. “When a ruling party controls enforcement, controls prosecution, and treats accountability as optional, force becomes governance.”
Silence as Policy
Republican leadership has not condemned either killing. No GOP-led congressional committee has opened a formal inquiry. No subpoenas have been issued. No agents have been suspended publicly.
Instead, enforcement continues — unchanged.
At the same time, the shutdown and disruption of TikTok, a major platform for documenting raids and protests, sharply reduced the spread of video evidence contradicting official narratives. Activists report protest footage disappearing while official statements circulate freely.
Corporate leaders issued calls for “de-escalation,” language critics say historically functions to protect power, not people.
To civil rights groups, the conclusion is no longer speculative.
“When the state kills, the party in power refuses to investigate, and the evidence is buried,” one advocate said, “that is not disorder. That is control.”
For critics, history does not repeat itself identically — but it warns.
Unchecked authority, normalized violence, and silence from those in power, they argue, have never been neutral forces.
They have always been the mechanism.
