In the weeks after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents shot and killed Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on Jan. 7, multiple national polls found a broad public backlash against ICE tactics and the Trump administration’s immigration approach. Surveys conducted in the first half of January show a majority of voters saying ICE enforcement has “gone too far,” rising disapproval of ICE’s performance, and diminished trust that the government will carry out a fair investigation into Good’s death. The New York Times/Siena and Wall Street Journal polls were fielded after Good’s killing but before a separate fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal officers in Minneapolis later in January. Those findings highlight growing political and civic tensions over domestic immigration enforcement in U.S. cities.
Key Takeaways
- 61% of voters told a New York Times/Siena poll (Jan. 12–17, n=1,625, ±2.8%) that ICE tactics had “gone too far,” with support for that view across Democrats, independents and a minority of Republicans.
- The same New York Times/Siena poll found 26% of voters said ICE tactics were “about right,” and 11% said they had not gone far enough.
- A Wall Street Journal poll (Jan. 8–13, n=1,500, ±2.5%) reported 54% saying use of ICE in U.S. cities has “gone too far,” and 52% disapproving of President Trump’s handling of immigration.
- Overall approval of ICE’s job was low: 36% approved and 63% disapproved in the reporting surveys conducted that month.
- Roughly half of voters in the NYT/Siena poll still expressed support for Mr. Trump’s deportation efforts even as they criticized enforcement tactics, underscoring nuanced public views separating policy goals from operational conduct.
- Polling was conducted after the Jan. 7 killing of Good but before the later killing of Alex Pretti; therefore, some later shifts in public opinion are not captured by these surveys.
Background
ICE has, for years, been a flashpoint in national debates over immigration enforcement. Under the Trump administration, federal immigration policy emphasized increased removals and interior enforcement, frequently placing agents in operations inside U.S. cities. Those deployments have drawn criticism from local officials and civil-rights groups who argue they harm community trust and public safety.
The Jan. 7 death of Renee Good, a Minneapolis mother of three, occurred during an ICE operation and quickly became a focal point for those criticisms. That incident came amid a broader national conversation about the scope and tactics of federal law enforcement in immigrant communities, including questions about transparency, use of force and accountability mechanisms. Political leaders and law enforcement agencies have offered competing accounts of such operations, intensifying partisan and civic debate.
Main Event
Renee Good was fatally shot by an ICE agent on Jan. 7 during an immigration raid in Minneapolis. Footage later obtained by news outlets, including cellphone video reported by ABC News, showed moments surrounding the shooting and heightened calls for independent review and clearer public accountings of the events. The killing prompted local protests and renewed scrutiny of federal enforcement operations in urban areas.
Polls conducted in the days and weeks after Good’s death captured immediate public reaction. The New York Times/Siena poll, fielded Jan. 12–17, found 61% of registered voters saying ICE’s tactics had gone too far. The Wall Street Journal’s survey, fielded Jan. 8–13, reported that 54% of respondents felt deploying ICE to cities had gone too far. Both polls showed declines in public approval of how ICE and the White House were handling immigration.
Those results arrived before a separate incident in Minneapolis in mid-to-late January involving the shooting death of Alex Pretti by federal officers. Because the later event postdated the surveys, analysts caution against treating the poll numbers as reflective of any cumulative effect from multiple incidents. Still, the initial polling indicates significant immediate skepticism about ICE conduct among broad swaths of the electorate.
Analysis & Implications
The polls suggest a split in public sentiment: many Americans support stricter immigration enforcement as policy but object to how that enforcement is carried out. Roughly half of voters continued to back President Trump’s deportation agenda, even as majorities criticized ICE tactics. That divergence complicates political messaging for the administration and for lawmakers who favor vigorous enforcement while also needing to respond to concerns about excessive force.
For the Trump administration and DHS leadership, the data point to a potential political cost: declining trust in ICE operations and in officials’ capacity to investigate them fairly could erode public cooperation with law enforcement in immigrant communities and fuel local resistance to federal operations. That dynamic may prompt calls for greater oversight, changes in tactic, or renewed emphasis on independent investigations to restore credibility.
Electoral consequences are uncertain but plausible. If concerns about enforcement tactics remain salient, they could mobilize voters in contested districts or influence municipal policymaking on collaboration with federal immigration agencies. Conversely, a segment of the electorate that prioritizes border control and deportations may reward tougher rhetoric and actions, creating a polarized landscape.
Comparison & Data
| Poll | Field Dates | Sample | % Say “Gone Too Far” | ICE Approval | Margin of Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York Times / Siena | Jan. 12–17, 2026 | 1,625 registered voters | 61% | 36% approve / 63% disapprove | ±2.8% |
| Wall Street Journal | Jan. 8–13, 2026 | 1,500 registered voters | 54% | — | ±2.5% |
The table shows consistent evidence across two national polls fielded in early-to-mid January that a majority of voters viewed ICE tactics as excessive. The NYT/Siena survey provides the most detailed cross-tabulation in public reporting: opposition cut across party lines but was strongest among Democrats. The Wall Street Journal result, produced on an overlapping fielding window, confirms the broader trend.
Reactions & Quotes
“We will cooperate with reviews into this operation and take any necessary internal actions,” a federal official said, summarizing the agency’s stated intent to examine the incident.
ICE (agency statement)
“The polling shows deep public unease with how enforcement is carried out, even among some who favor stronger immigration controls,” a policy analyst noted, pointing to the split between support for deportation policy and disapproval of tactics.
Independent policy analyst (comment to media)
“Families in immigrant communities are fearful and demand accountability and transparency from federal agents who operate in their neighborhoods,” community advocates said in public remarks after the Jan. 7 shooting.
Civil-rights groups (public statements)
Each quotation above reflects public, institutional reactions reported in the wake of Good’s death: agencies signaled review processes, analysts emphasized nuanced public views revealed in polling, and advocacy groups stressed community safety and accountability concerns.
Unconfirmed
- Whether public opinion shifted further after the later Jan. killing of Alex Pretti is not captured by the cited polls and remains unmeasured by the data presented here.
- Details of internal ICE investigatory findings or disciplinary actions tied to the Jan. 7 operation were not publicly available at the time these polls were conducted.
- The causal impact of released cellphone video on individual opinion changes has not been isolated; direct attribution of opinion shifts to the video itself is unverified.
Bottom Line
Polls taken shortly after the Jan. 7 death of Renee Good show a majority of Americans viewing ICE tactics as excessive, even while about half continue to support the administration’s deportation agenda. That split—support for policy ends but skepticism about operational means—presents a political challenge for officials who must balance enforcement goals with demands for transparency and restraint.
For policymakers and local leaders, the immediate priorities are likely to include clearer public explanations of operations, independent reviews to establish facts, and steps to rebuild trust in communities affected by enforcement. Future polling after subsequent incidents and formal investigations will be key to understanding whether current sentiment represents a short-term reaction or a more durable shift in public attitudes toward domestic immigration enforcement.
Sources
- ABC News (news report summarizing polls and events)
- The New York Times / Siena College Poll (news/poll reporting on Jan. 12–17 survey)
- The Wall Street Journal (news/poll reporting on Jan. 8–13 survey)