Scott Jennings, a CNN senior political commentator, is drawing a direct connection between the inflammatory rhetoric from Democrats and a tragic incident involving an ICE agent in Minneapolis. The fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good occurred under circumstances that Jennings believes are symptomatic of a broader crisis of political vigilantism.
During his appearance on “CNN NewsNight,” Jennings stated, “It strikes me that we are undergoing an epidemic of political vigilantism right now.” His observation suggests that there is a troubling trend of individuals feeling emboldened to confront federal law enforcement, marked by a rising number of violent incidents across the country. Jennings highlighted the increasing frequency of vehicle-related attacks against ICE agents, a demographic that has seen a reported surge of 1,300 percent in such incidents from the year prior. Jennings noted that people are now showing up in vehicles as a means to obstruct lawful federal operations—an act he believes is fueled by derogatory portrayals of law enforcement by public officials.
The comments from Democratic leaders have not gone unnoticed. For instance, Jennings noted the incendiary remarks from Minnesota’s lieutenant governor, who previously urged constituents “to put your bodies on the line.” He quoted Governor Tim Walz’s comments comparing ICE to the Gestapo, which could incite extreme behavior among supporters. “What do you think happens when you radicalize a base of people about this?” Jennings asked, pressing the importance of accountability for political rhetoric.
ICU on the ground has also come under fire. Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey joined the fray, urging ICE to “get the f*ck out” of the city and denouncing the Trump administration for “sowing chaos.” These strong remarks resonate through Jennings’ analysis, suggesting an atmosphere where anti-ICE sentiment encourages dangerous confrontations.
Data from the Department of Homeland Security underscores this alarming trend. With 99 vehicular attacks reported against federal law enforcement by November 2025, the figures starkly illustrate a doubling of incidents from the previous year. Jennings points to these statistics as a wake-up call, accentuating that discussions surrounding the “Abolish ICE” movement by various Democratic candidates contribute to a narrative that vilifies federal agents.
Furthermore, Jennings provided insight into the dangers faced by ICE agents, recalling that one agent had been attacked in June when an anti-ICE protester rammed his vehicle into him, resulting in a violent confrontation. Such incidents add a grim dimension to the broader discourse—one where the line between protest and violence appears increasingly blurred.
In reflecting on Jennings’ assessment, it is imperative to recognize the intricate relationship between political discourse and social action. As tensions rise, the implications of language used by elected officials become even more significant, especially as they pertain to law enforcement. Jennings’ assertion that political rhetoric can breed vigilantism raises pressing questions about accountability and the responsibility that comes with public office.
Overall, Jennings’ comments serve as a crucial reminder of the tenuous balance between advocating for change and fostering respect for law enforcement in the ongoing national dialogue. Each incendiary remark carries weight, as does the responsibility to ensure that calls for action do not lead to greater violence.
"*" indicates required fields
