On January 24, 2026, Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a 37‑year‑old intensive care unit (ICU) nurse and U.S. citizen, was fatally shot by federal agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota, during an immigration enforcement operation. Pretti, who worked at a VA hospital and had no criminal record, drew national attention after video footage and eyewitness accounts suggested he was shot while being restrained by officers. Multiple reports from independent outlets noted that Pretti was involved in a confrontation with U.S. Border Patrol agents — part of a larger federal presence in the city — and that body‑camera footage appeared to contradict early official claims about what happened. Witness videos circulated widely showing Pretti being forcibly taken to the ground and, at some point during the struggle, dying from gunshot wounds — footage that added to public outrage and confusion about the incident.

His death marked the second fatal shooting by federal immigration enforcement in Minneapolis in a short period, following the earlier killing of Renee Good, a 37‑year‑old mother of three. The consecutive shootings intensified scrutiny of federal law enforcement tactics, fueled protests in Minneapolis and beyond, and drew widespread calls for investigation and accountability. Civil rights advocates, community members, and national organizations expressed grave concern about the escalation of force in the city and demanded transparency from federal authorities. Local officials, including Minneapolis police leadership, also weighed in, acknowledging the complexity of the investigations while underscoring the public’s eroding trust in federal actions.

In the immediate aftermath, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials released statements asserting that the officers involved fired their weapons because Pretti posed a threat. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem claimed that Pretti had resisted efforts to disarm him and that the use of force was justified. A congressional notice later confirmed that two federal officers fired shots during the encounter and that they believed Pretti was armed and posed a danger. These official narratives, however, were sharply contested by video evidence and witness testimonies that suggested Pretti may not have been a clear or immediate threat at the moments before he was shot.

The public debate over Pretti’s actions, the appropriateness of the agents’ response, and the accuracy of federal claims quickly became polarized. Some administration allies and commentators — including senior figures on social media — characterized Pretti as threatening or hostile toward law enforcement, with statements alleging he intended to harm federal agents. These remarks triggered significant backlash from gun rights groups, civil liberties advocates, and many within the Republican Party who pointed out that Pretti was a lawful concealed‑carry permit holder under Minnesota law and that owning a firearm in public was permitted. The evolving and often conflicting narratives widened public skepticism and intensified calls for independent review of the shooting.

As details about the shooting spread, protests erupted in Minneapolis and in other cities, with demonstrators urging accountability and the removal of federal immigration agents from the region. The demonstrations were marked by chants, rallies, and vigils honoring Pretti and Renee Good, along with sharp criticism of federal enforcement tactics. Local activists and community members expressed frustration with what they viewed as aggressive and unaccountable actions by Border Patrol and ICE agents. These protests occurred against a backdrop of heightened tensions caused by the surge of federal agents operating in a predominantly Democratic city, adding to the sense of crisis in Minneapolis.

In response to mounting concerns, a federal judge in Minnesota issued a temporary restraining order barring the Department of Homeland Security from destroying or altering evidence related to the Pretti shooting. This legal intervention came amid efforts by state authorities to secure critical materials — including body‑cam footage and other physical evidence — that could shed light on the circumstances of the fatal encounter. The order underscored the serious doubts among state officials about the thoroughness and transparency of the federal investigation, as well as broader concerns that critical evidence might be compromised, impeding accountability and public trust.

Against this backdrop of controversy and public debate, First Lady Melania Trump made a rare public statement about the incident on January 27, 2026. Speaking in an interview on Fox & Friends, she called for national unity and peaceful protest in response to the unrest following Pretti’s death. Melania urged that demonstrations remain nonviolent and emphasized the need for cohesion rather than escalating anger. She referenced discussions between President Donald Trump and Minnesota political leaders — including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey — emphasizing efforts to coordinate a peaceful response to the protests. Her message was notably focused on calm and unity, with repeated calls for peaceful expression of dissent, a departure from the more partisan or accusatory rhetoric prevalent in other statements about the incident.

Melania Trump emphasized that violence should be avoided and that Americans should work together during this sensitive period. She did not directly address specific details of the shooting or critique federal law enforcement actions but instead centered her remarks on encouraging respectful protest and cooperation among community members. Observers noted that her public appeal for unity was unusual given the typically limited political commentary by the First Lady on contentious national issues. Her remarks were interpreted by many as an attempt to temper rising tensions and shift the narrative toward peaceful civic engagement rather than further polarization.

The Pretti shooting and the subsequent public responses, including Melania Trump’s plea, have had broader implications for political discourse and administrative strategy. President Trump publicly commented on the shooting, acknowledging that he did not view Pretti as acting as an assassin — a revision from earlier official assertions — but also criticizing Pretti for carrying a firearm at the scene despite Minnesota’s permissive gun laws. This statement placed the president at odds with some gun rights advocates and other conservatives, highlighting fractures within his political base over the incident. Meanwhile, federal authorities, including the border enforcement leadership in Minnesota, faced leadership changes, reflecting pressure from both local officials and national criticism.

The incident also fueled debate about federal immigration enforcement tactics in urban areas, with critics arguing that the presence and conduct of federal agents in Minneapolis escalated tensions rather than enhanced public safety. Local politicians, civil liberties organizations, and even some national figures called for a comprehensive review of federal involvement and demanded accountability for Pretti’s death. These calls coincided with legal efforts to preserve evidence and ensure transparent investigations, further intensifying the political spotlight on both immigration policy and federal law enforcement practices. In this broader context, Melania Trump’s appeal for unity was seen as part of a wider effort to navigate public relations challenges and mitigate civil unrest, even as deeper divisions persisted.

As investigations into the shooting continue, the nation remains divided over questions of accountability, law enforcement conduct, and the proper balance between public safety and civil liberties. Pretti’s family and supporters have rejected some official claims about the incident, demanding full transparency and accountability. Critics argue that federal agents’ use of force was excessive and that initial statements from administration officials contributed to misinformation. Meanwhile, supporters of federal enforcement assert that agents acted within their authority and that violent confrontations with protesters required defensive measures. These competing narratives reflect broader national debates over immigration policy, policing, and civil rights that extend beyond the circumstances of this single incident.

The controversy surrounding the Pretti shooting and Melania Trump’s rare public statement highlight the intense scrutiny faced by federal authorities and elected officials when responding to high‑profile, emotionally charged events. Her call for unity and peaceful protest added an unusually conciliatory dimension to the public discourse, even as deeply entrenched disagreements persist. With legal actions underway, ongoing investigations, and public debate likely to continue, the Pretti shooting represents a significant flashpoint in discussions about federal authority, civil rights, and the responsibilities of government leaders to both uphold the law and maintain public trust — issues that will continue to reverberate in Minnesota and across the United States.