After The Minnesota Shootings, American Democracy Endures

Protests and Tragedy in Minnesota Led to a Withdrawal, Not a Government Crackdown.

It's easy to focus on the tragedy of Minnesota since two young Americans lost their lives. The heartbreak was made worse by the callous comments we heard from some commentaries on the right. The tone was in keeping with an unfortunate trend we've seen from the administration, including a playful cartoon depiction of a deadly strike on alleged drug smugglers and the use of half-naked prisoners in El Salvador as a backdrop for social media. Arguments about whether the people targeted by this speech are guilty or innocent misses the point. Even the guilty are entitled to a degree of human dignity.

Watching the government's actions in Minnesota might give the impression of an executive branch out of control. A group of Americans probably see the authoritarianism often foretold in left-leaning media. The president's bad decisions in Minnesota are part of the story, but the other part is a testament to our country's strong foundation and resilience. Understanding America requires an acknowledgment of both sides of the story. Avoiding overreactions, cynicism or hopelessness means seeing the parts of our nation that are still functioning as designed.

Democrats seem more upset by the deaths in Minnesota than Republicans, but conservatives should be equally concerned about the government's actions. It's possible for conservatives to support strict enforcement of immigration laws and still find fault with the government's conduct. It's also possible to criticize activists who threaten federal agents and fair to point out the excesses of protestors. This doesn't preclude recognizing that the loss of life was most likely unnecessary.

Conservatives should be uncomfortable with the heavy-handed use of federal power in Minnesota since they've traditionally recognized the consequences of a highly centralized and aggressive federal government. FBI Director Kash Patel's condemnation of Alex Pretti for bringing a weapon to a protest flies in the face of conservative dogma about the right to bear arms. The spin offered by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, describing Renee Good as a domestic terrorist long before the facts were known, should offend conservatives who don't want federal officials manipulating the truth for political ends. Many of Donald Trump's voters supported him because they saw his candidacy as the antidote to a system that wasn't honest or transparent. Rather than live up to this expectation, Noem's behavior fits the stereotype of government officials willing to say whatever's necessary to protect themselves and advance a political agenda.

Most Americans don't want masked men with guns on their streets. They don't want federal agents spraying chemical irritants in the faces of protestors unless it's strictly necessary and a majority of Americans don't support the president's handling of immigration. That doesn't mean they want protestors acting in lawless ways, and leaders have a responsibility to call on crowds to show restraint. It's clear from videos in Minnesota that some protestors are overstepping reasonable bounds. The president has put ICE agents in an impossible position, but that doesn't alleviate their special responsibility to de-escalate when they can. In totalitarian states people know that talking back to police might mean the end of their life. In America we've tolerated a degree of disrespect, as distasteful as that is, because compelling respect by force seems worse.

In Maryland, the legislature is working to pass a bill making it a civil violation to wear a mask while performing a law enforcement function. This is problematic because it seems to open the door for other states to legislate the conduct of federal law enforcement in ways that Democrats would oppose. States in the south, for instance, might make it illegal for federal officers to use equipment they deem necessary to protect abortion clinics or enforce environmental law. Partly for this reason, Maryland's technique is probably wrong even if the message is clear and right. There are few places Americans would want to live in the world that have police officers in masks. It's not a behavior we should emulate but it also doesn't make sense for us to create an unpredictable mix of state laws trying to regulate federal conduct.

Maryland's mask law is missing something. ICE agents are facing serious threats to their safety and the well-being of their families. Sharing the home addresses of immigration agents for the purpose of inviting harassment is just as wrong as agents wearing masks. Any legislation addressing masks should also address the issue that made masks necessary in the first place. A ban on posting addresses probably wouldn't survive first amendment protections, but there are other ways to tackle the problem. The Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act of 2022 targets the commercial act of selling the personal information of federal judges. Something similar could be added to Maryland's legislation and a national version should be considered in Congress.

Through the chaos and tragedy, Minnesota showed something extraordinary about America. Though it's common among many to believe that our Democracy is collapsing, events after Alex Pretti's heartbreaking death suggest something different. President Trump responded to public pressure and called the Democratic mayor of Minneapolis and the Democratic governor of Minnesota. He replaced the border patrol agent whose bravado and tactics were escalating rather than calming tensions. The agents who shot Pretti were placed on administrative leave and the U.S. Justice Department has opened a Civil Rights investigation into the killing.

Two Americans lost their lives in Minnesota. Except for careless and dishonest rhetoric about domestic terrorists, there was no escalation after the deaths by the federal government. This may seem like a low bar, but it's a critical point to consider. There was no Tiananmen Square moment in Minneapolis reminiscent of the 1989 crackdown by the Chinese military that killed hundreds of protestors. There was no echo of Hungary in 1956 when the Soviet Army killed 2,500 people and no hint of what happened in Czechoslovakia in 1968 when the Soviets killed 137 protestors. For all our problems, it's disingenuous and unproductive to suggest that our country resembles the type of dictatorship that massacres people in the streets.

This fall Democrats are likely to win control of the House of Representatives. In a recent special election in Texas, the Democrat upset the Republican candidate in a solidly Republican district by a double digit margin. President Trump is genuinely unpopular and doesn't have the ability to manipulate approval ratings. Unlike Russia's Vladimir Putin, a dictator who maintains a genuinely high level of support, or Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro who fabricated poll results, President Trump's approval rating is 38% and falling. Whatever his instincts, President Trump is no dictator and America is no autocracy. Democrats are doing themselves a disservice when they offer emotional conclusions that are unsupported by facts. Winning elections means earning credibility and that means being honest with voters.

Rather than prove our Democracy is lost, the sad events in Minnesota show the continued vitality of our system. No tanks appeared on the streets and large-scale protests continued. Politicians kept campaigning and the midterm elections drew closer. It's fair to say our system is stressed but stressed is different than broken. America is more resilient than people are being led to believe.

Colin Pascal is a retired Army lieutenant colonel and a graduate student in the School of Public Affairs at American University. He lives in Annapolis.