DOJ confirms review triggered by officer use of lethal force

The killing of Alex Pretti by federal officers in Minnesota spurred backlash from Second Amendment advocates after some Trump administration officials initially claimed Pretti was armed and dangerous, but the unfolding investigation has not centered on gun-carrying policies.

Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse and licensed concealed-carry holder, was killed during an immigration enforcement operation Saturday, and the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice are investigating it through the lens of typical use-of-force policies, despite a national narrative that emerged about gun rights.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed Friday that the FBI was conducting alongside DHS’ investigative unit a “standard investigation … when there’s circumstances like what we saw last Saturday,” in reference to the many instances of federal officers using deadly force during altercations.

ALEX PRETTI SHOULD HAVE FACED CHARGES FOR SPITTING ON AGENT BEFORE FATAL SHOOTING: FORMER PROSECUTOR

Blanche noted that the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division lawyers would be involved as needed, suggesting the agencies were scrutinizing the officers’ actions and whether they were appropriate.

Amy Swearer, a senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom who specializes in firearm issues, said some of the initial statements made by members of the Trump administration about Pretti were “so extraordinarily unhelpful” in terms of the public perception about the incident.

Videos circulating online showed a chaotic mix of Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection agents wrestling Pretti to the ground. After one agent disarmed Pretti by pulling his firearm, which he legally owned and carried, from his waist, he was shot roughly ten times and died at the scene.

“I think it would have been a lot more helpful if the Trump administration had been more careful with their words and had more clearly conveyed that the problem wasn’t he publicly carried a firearm in any of his capacity,” Swearer said. “It was the fact that — by being armed and then getting into this confrontation with law enforcement — that gun became a factor in the use-of-force analysis.”

The Second Amendment conversation was exacerbated by several officials in the Trump administration in the immediate aftermath of the incident, prior to videos and analyses revealing that Pretti had not brandished his weapon and was disarmed at the time he was shot.

Perhaps most prominently, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in Central California, wrote on X: “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you. Don’t do it!”

Essayli’s remarks led to a rare rebuke from the National Rifle Association, which called his comments “dangerous and wrong.” The NRA noted that “responsible public voices should be awaiting a full investigation, not making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens.”

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller called Pretti an “assassin” and a “domestic terrorist” in social media posts.

Greg Bovino, who was head of Border Patrol operations in Minneapolis at the time but has since been reassigned, claimed after the incident that Pretti wanted to “massacre law enforcement.”

DHS SECRETARY KRISTI NOEM ADDRESSES CALLS FOR HER FIRING, NEW ALEX PRETTI VIDEO

Swearer noted that the gun rights conversation that emerged “just confused a lot of people as to why he was shot in the first place.”

“It really did turn the broader national conversation into this idea of, ‘Well, this is a Second Amendment issue,’” she said. “It almost conveyed to people that, ‘Well, the reason he was shot wasn’t because he’s physically on the ground with officers.'”