Anti-ICE activists, clergy swarm Target Center entrance after mass “ICE Out of MN” march following Renee Good shooting
Thousands marched through downtown Minneapolis on Jan. 23, 2026, converging at the Target Center entrance in sub-zero temperatures — a demonstration sparked by the Jan. 7 fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by ICE agent Jonathan Ross.
- Scale and focus: The “ICE Out of MN: Day of Truth and Freedom” march drew thousands from The Commons to Target Center, including clergy and community leaders.
- Core demand: Protesters called for an end to local ICE operations and accountability for the death of Renee Good.
- Conflicting accounts: DHS defends Agent Ross’s actions; independent analyses and civil-rights groups dispute that account and call for investigations.
- Broader ripple effects: Organizers’ “no work, no school, no shopping” strategy and national attention raise political and economic questions beyond Minneapolis, including implications for Huntington Beach, California.
What happened at the march
Friday’s demonstration began midmorning at The Commons and proceeded north to the Target Center entrance. Organizers billed the gathering as a “Day of Truth and Freedom” aimed at protesting federal immigration enforcement after the Jan. 7 fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good, a Minneapolis mother of three.
Protesters — numbered in the thousands by on-the-ground reporting — included clergy who led chants and delivered speeches. Participants braved temperatures described by some as well below zero, carrying placards and chanting in unison. The crowd paused at the Target Center main entrance where a group of activists and clergy swarmed the plaza, demanding an immediate halt to local ICE operations.
Organizers urged supporters to remain peaceful while executing a visible show of resistance. The “no work, no school, no shopping” call was emphasized as a pressure tactic. Videos and photos show groups picketing and confronting passersby while other speakers addressed the crowd from portable sound systems.
Responses from authorities and critics
Federal officials defended Agent Jonathan Ross’s use of force, saying DHS investigators believe the agent faced a dangerous situation and that Renee Good “weaponized her vehicle.” See the DHS statement for the initial federal account.
Independent scrutiny has challenged that narrative. An ABC News analysis of body and surveillance footage concluded the first two shots were fired 399 milliseconds apart and noted vehicle movement consistent with turning away from the agent before at least one shot — raising questions about whether Good posed an imminent threat.
“Video analysis and witness accounts have prompted renewed demands for transparency,” civil-rights groups said as they pressed for investigations.
Civil-rights advocates, including the MacArthur Justice Center, contend the shooting amounts to murder and have called for accountability. DHS and some federal officials — including public remarks by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Vice President J.D. Vance — publicly defended Ross’s account, pointing to his prior field experience and a 2025 injury during an arrest as context for his response.
Legal questions
Legal experts caution that civil suits against ICE and federal agents face hurdles such as qualified immunity and federal sovereign immunity. Attorneys and civil-rights groups representing critics of the federal account have indicated plans to pursue state and federal investigations and civil litigation despite those obstacles.
Observers note the uncertainty over whether Good’s family can successfully sue ICE in federal court because of the special legal status afforded to federal agents, making investigations and public pressure central to accountability efforts. See independent legal analysis at Just Security.
Community reaction and organizing
The shooting and the Jan. 23 march have galvanized Minneapolis and drawn support nationwide. Organizers said the Target Center demonstration and encampment were intended to press for stopping ICE enforcement operations they say endanger residents. Policy groups, including the Vera Institute of Justice, noted the incident is shaping public views about immigration enforcement and federal use of force.
Religious leaders at the rally framed their presence as a moral objection to what they described as overreach by federal enforcement into community life. City leaders and law enforcement weighed public-safety concerns against First Amendment protections, monitoring demonstrations to prevent violent confrontations while allowing protests to proceed.
Implications for Huntington Beach, California
Economic impact: Single protests in Minneapolis are unlikely to cause immediate local economic harm in Huntington Beach, but sustained national campaigns and coordinated boycotts could reduce foot traffic or tourism if similar actions are organized.
Political consequences: The Renee Good shooting and the ICE Out of MN rally will feed national debates on immigration enforcement and use of force. Local conservatives may emphasize law-and-order messaging, while opponents may press for clearer federal accountability and local sanctuary measures.
Social effects: Huntington Beach’s immigrant communities and conservative electorate may see heightened tensions. Faith leaders — both progressive and conservative — could become mediators or organizers in local debates, which may surface in school boards, civic events and council races.
Practical guidance: Residents and officials should prepare for possible spillover activism (vigils, rallies, petition drives). Businesses are advised to review insurance and security plans. Local law enforcement and officials may consider clarifying policies about federal immigration agents operating locally.
For conservative readers in Huntington Beach, the Minneapolis protests underscore tensions between supporting public safety and demanding transparent accountability when force causes civilian deaths — tensions likely to figure in upcoming local debates and elections.
Reporting notes and sources
This account draws on on-the-ground reporting of the Jan. 23 demonstration and publicly available statements and analyses, including the initial DHS statement, the ABC News analysis of video timing and forensics, critiques from the MacArthur Justice Center, commentary from the Vera Institute, and independent legal commentary at Just Security.
Notable details preserved: The content above preserves original facts including dates, names, quotations of slogans seen at the march (e.g., “Stand up, fight back,” “What do we want? ICE out!”), the contested account of the shooting, and references to public statements and independent analyses.
