Faith Leaders Protest Killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis

Protests have erupted nationwide in response to the January 7th killing of Renee Good by an ICE agent. The fatal shooting has rapidly divided the nation, with some alleging that ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot Good in self defense, while others call it nothing less than state-sanctioned murder.

Now, faith leaders across the country are moving from the pulpit to the streets as outrage over the incident continues to swirl.

Faith Leaders Take to the Streets

Fury over the incident is most concentrated in Minneapolis, where tens of thousands have marched through downtown corridors and demonstrated outside federal buildings in the days after Good’s death.

Many of the faith leaders calling for justice in Minneapolis today were also key organizers of the demonstrations protesting the police murder of George Floyd in 2020, drawing direct parallels between the two killings.

Among them is Rabbi Jason Rodich, who says Good was "murdered by forces of evil."

“We have now witnessed Renee Good be shot in the street because she wanted to be a legal observer, a moral witness for her neighbors,” said the Rev. JaNaé Bates Imari, who heads a multifaith activist group. “In the Holy Scriptures, in the Bible, it says, ‘Woe to those who decree unjust laws.’ Today that woe belongs to DHS, to ICE and to those in Congress who refuse to hold them accountable.”

Anger Toward the White House

Protests over the killing are erupting across the country – and some are taking their outrage directly to Washington D.C.

“God is not neutral about violence. God is not neutral about state power,” said the Rev. Cassandra Gould, who recently organized a faith-based protest outside the White House. “God is also not a God of silence, and neither is the church.”

Bishop Dwayne Royster put a more direct challenge to president, saying, “somebody’s gotta hold Donald Trump accountable for all the evil that’s happening in this country.”

A Nation Divided

Even as outrage intensifies across the country, not everyone sees Good as a victim. The Trump administration alleges she was a “domestic terrorist” who weaponized her vehicle in an attempt to kill Ross. Ross, the government says, had no choice but to defend himself with deadly force.

President Trump described Good as “very violent” and “very radical."

Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance described her death as “a tragedy of her own making.” Vance's remarks in particular struck a nerve, with some critics going as far as to question the sincerity of his Catholic faith. 

“Vance’s twisted and wrongheaded view of Christianity has been repudiated by two popes,” wrote National Catholic Reporter digital editor John Grosso. “His Catholicism seems to be little more than a political prop, a tool only for his career ambitions and desire for power.”

This is far from a one-sided issue for faith leaders, however. 

Other prominent figures – particularly those aligned with the Trump Administration – condemned the protests and even insinuated that demonstrators are being paid to attend.

“The protests we see across the country right now are underpinned by the radical socialist left, whose goal is to make the United States like Venezuela, ultimately destroying the America we know,” wrote evangelist Franklin Graham in a fiery Facebook post.

The Role of Faith in Tragedy

The uproar over Renee Good’s killing has become more than a debate about one tragic moment; For the faithful, it is also a referendum on the moral responsibility of the religious community to protest injustice – if only they could agree on what actually happened.

For some religious leaders, this is a clear-cut case of standing with the vulnerable against the unchecked use of state power. For others, the protests themselves are viewed as insincere political theater over the death of a woman who foolishly disobeyed authority and paid the ultimate price.

As churches, clergy, and believers line up on opposite sides of the street, the question lingers: what role should faith play when the nation is so polarized that the facts of this case can’t be agreed upon?