DHS Reverses Course, Places Officers on Leave in Alex Pretti Shooting Amidst Growing Pressure
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has placed the federal officers involved in the shooting death of Alex Pretti on administrative leave, a significant reversal from earlier statements and a response to mounting pressure from Congress and advocacy groups. This shift comes as the agency faces a potential funding battle and calls for accountability following the controversial incident.
Initial Claims Contradicted by DHS Action
The decision to place the officers on leave directly contradicts previous assertions made by top Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino. Bovino had stated on Monday that “all agents that were involved in that scene are working, not in Minneapolis, but in other locations.” A Customs and Border Protection (CBP) spokesperson confirmed to The Guardian that the two officers are now on administrative leave, characterizing it as “standard protocol.” However, as of this reporting, the identities of the officers remain undisclosed.
Escalating Scrutiny and a Preliminary Report
DHS provided a preliminary report to Congress this week detailing that two agents discharged their firearms at Pretti, a Border Patrol agent and CBP officer. This finding aligns with independent analyses of the event, which indicate the agents fired at least 10 shots at Pretti within a span of five seconds, based on video footage. The about-face regarding the agents’ status, coupled with the invocation of “standard protocol,” suggests the administration is attempting to navigate a complex response and potentially identify a scapegoat in the wake of the shooting.
Political Pressure Mounts on Administration Officials
The administration is grappling with dual pressures: demands for the resignation of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and immigration chief Stephen Miller, and a potential Senate vote to block DHS’s funding bill. Officials who initially offered strong statements regarding the incident have since moderated their rhetoric. For example, Miller, on Wednesday, pointed to the “CBP team” as being responsible for the killing, stating the White House had provided “clear guidance” for officers protecting “arrest teams,” implying the shooting may have deviated from established procedures.
“We are evaluating why the CBP team may not have been following that protocol,” Miller said in a statement to news outlets.
From “Assassin” to Scapegoating: A Rapid Shift in Narrative
This represents a stark departure from Miller’s initial characterization of Pretti as an “assassin” and “domestic terrorist” shortly after the shooting on Saturday. Noem similarly labeled Pretti’s actions – reportedly filming ICE activity with his phone – as the “definition of domestic terrorism.” Bovino, without providing evidence, claimed Pretti intended to “massacre law enforcement.” These extreme statements prompted even the White House to distance itself, despite continued criticism of the Veterans Affairs ICU nurse from President Donald Trump and other executive officials. The Trump administration subsequently reassigned Bovino and revoked his access to his X account, where he was a frequent poster.
However, the administration’s distancing from the most inflammatory claims is likely an attempt to deflect attention from its ongoing enforcement actions. DHS remains active in Minneapolis, with staunchly anti-immigration Tom Homan reportedly now leading the operation. Furthermore, the Trump administration is reportedly escalating its efforts against those opposing ICE, with FBI Director Kash Patel announcing on Monday that his agency is investigating Signal chats used by ICE watchers for organizing.
Civil Rights Investigation Foregone
In a notable departure from standard procedure, the Department of Justice has decided not to pursue a civil rights investigation into the killing of Pretti, despite such investigations being customary in cases of fatal shootings involving law enforcement. This decision raises further questions about the administration’s commitment to accountability and transparency in the handling of this case.
This article was originally published by Truthout and is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Please maintain all links and credits in accordance with our republishing guidelines.
