Who Gets to Decide Who’s A Domestic Terrorist?

By Andrew Spellman

A bullet hole and blood stains are seen in a crashed vehicle on at the scene of a shooting in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Ben Hovland/Minnesota Public Radio)

Originally published on ‘Spirit of Jefferson’

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

An excerpt from George Orwell’s novel “1984,” this quote is quickly circulating on social media platforms. Google shows that it’s a trending search alongside other terms relating to the killing of Renee Nicole Good, the 37-year-old mother of three from Minneapolis, yesterday, who was fatally shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent and, before the news cycle could fully develop, was being labeled a “domestic terrorist” by Homeland Security Sec. Kristi Noem.

The Trump adminstration wasted no time pushing a false narrative that Good tried to run over the ICE agent and, while he was near Good’s SUV as she was trying to leave the scene as other federal agents were attempting to get her out of her car in the snow-covered street, the evidence we have all seen shows that officer wasn’t in any real danger of a car going, realistically, less than 10 mph.

While specific details are still unclear as to why Good was blocking the roadway — other than it being an assumed act of protest — outside of the killing, maybe an overlooked detail of the shooting is that video shows the agent who fired was leaning toward the vehicle with his pistol tight to the glass of the windshield. The only one to draw his firearm in the video, too, seemingly makes it clearer that Good wasn’t a threat.

Further, why was he filming with a cell phone, and why did he not move a few steps to the right if he actually feared he would be struck by the vehicle? There was plenty of time to make that side step, and, if Good had committed a crime worth punishing, other avenues are available for law enforcement to ensure she faces justice. Perhaps if he hadn’t positioned himself in front of the SUV to record his video, Good would still be alive.

A year has yet to pass in President Donald Trump’s second term, yet tensions have been on the rise since he was sworn in. There have been many instances where I’ve asked myself, “Is this an inflection point?” Those moments, though, were seemingly washed over by whatever would happen the next day. Still, it felt like it would be a matter of time before ICE was caught killing someone — something Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz publicly expressed — whether within an appropriate law enforcement rationale or in a manner that screams extrajudicial, such as we saw yesterday.

I distinctly remember living in both Morgantown, W.Va., during the first Trump administration and witnessing moments that resided on the spectrum between massive peaceful protests and pure chaos. Though there is a laundry list of protests from Trump’s first term, three events related to the 2020 death of George Floyd in Minnapolis particularly flood my memories, like the Black Lives Matter protest in Berkeley Springs when counterprotestors clashed with peaceful protestors; a peaceful yet incredibly tense BLM protest in Terra Alta; and, of course, the nationwide protests that followed the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Yet, this time, there has been little resistance from those on the right to the countermovement.

This is a conundrum. For two diametrically opposed groups — and with a history of clashing at protests big and small — why is it that no real resistance is being seen at these public displays of opposition? I’ve asked many of my right-wing friends this, and no one can give me an answer; it’s certainly not a conspiracy that the others are left out of. Even my friends on the left can’t seem to wrap their minds around it.

And while an alarm is distantly buzzing in the recesses of my conscious mind regarding that, a new alarm is now blaring around me — perhaps because the boots on the ground from term one — like those involved in the Boogaloo movement — have shifted identities and have been unleashed.

The notion that Good, a U.S. citizen causing benign trouble, could so quickly be labeled a domestic terrorist is not something we’ve necessarily seen following a high-profile killing by the feds. Sure, the administration has flirted with the idea of labeling folks domestic terrorists for a litany of reasons, but this, to my recollection, is the first time it’s been used out of rehearsal.

Could the Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey be labeled a domestic terrorist for telling ICE to “get the fuck out” and standing up against the administration? Could Tim Walz be labeled a domestic terrorist for using his gubernatorial powers to activate the state’s national guard in what seems like a defensive act? Remember, Trump once said he regrets not using the Insurrection Act during his first term when Floyd was killed, and the protests and riots broke out.

Could journalists be labeled domestic terrorists for documenting what’s happening on the ground and capturing moments like yesterday’s killing or the brutal overstep of ICE and other federal agencies, as we’ve seen over the last few months in different cities? A few months ago, I bought a ballistic helmet and vest after speaking to a few colleagues who have been in dangerous situations. It was a temperature check to see if I needed to prepare, as I do in other areas of my life, in case one day I, God forbid, need to cover civil unrest in the DMV. It’s a terrifying thought for the editor-in-chief of a community newspaper.

And I hate to admit that one of my first thoughts yesterday was whether I would need it in the coming days, weeks or months. Admittedly, I pulled it out of storage, and it now stares at me across the room as I pen this.

Perhaps the biggest question: could you be labeled a domestic terrorist for simply using your First Amendment right to protest or to speak? Could you be labeled a terrorist if, suppose one day the administration throws a curveball and demands you hand over your firearms, you reject the order, citing the Second Amendment?

The speed at which Noem and the administration labeled Good a terrorist should concern everyone, regardless of party affiliation. I fully understand supporting a president and their administration because you think their policies will create a better future for you and your family, but we’re witnessing unprecedented moments virtually every week. When is it going to be enough? Who decides the meaning of “domestic terrorist” and who fits that description? Who gets to create reality and force us to reject the evidence we can so clearly see and hear?

Like every pivotal moment over the last 12 months, I ask myself, is this the moment the bubble pops? The answer is unclear, but the tension is almost unbearable.