Resolution criteria
A man died after an ICE-involved shooting in Minneapolis on January 24, 2026. This market resolves YES if any ICE or Border Patrol agent involved in this shooting faces any consequences, including but not limited to: criminal charges, indictment, conviction, administrative discipline, suspension, termination, or civil liability. Resolution will be determined by official statements from federal agencies, court records, or credible news reporting from established outlets. The market resolves NO if no agents involved face any consequences at all in the next 30 days. I will not count them being put on paid leave for the duration of the investigation (if that happens) since that is not a disciplinary measure.
Considerations
None of the shootings examined by investigative journalists resulted in an ICE agent being indicted, even in cases where someone was killed. None of the federal agents who fired their weapons at civilians has been charged with a crime in recent ICE shooting incidents. White House adviser Stephen Miller stated, "To all ICE officers: you have federal immunity in the conduct of your duties."
Update 2026-01-24 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Unpaid administrative leave will count as a consequence if it is ordered as a disciplinary measure.
Update 2026-01-24 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Administrative leave clarification: Routine administrative leave during an investigation does not count as a consequence. Administrative leave only counts if it is explicitly ordered as a disciplinary measure, not as part of standard procedure following a shooting.
1,000People are also trading
This won't happen in this timeframe.
If the local DA files charges, the DOJ will file federal charges, which risks a presidential pardon. Local authorities will wait until this is out of the news cycles, possibly until Trump is out of the picture, before doing anything. No statute of limitations on murder in Minnesota. If they want anyone to actually serve time for this, they will wait to prosecute until well after this market is closed. It would become wildly unpopular to do otherwise, despite calls to prosecute now.
@KJW_01294 Yes, I didn't include them in the title, but I explicitly mention Border Patrol in the question
@CommanderKeen intent specifically matters here? Means resolution likely to be subjective. Can you produce wording for yes and no
@JoeandSeth You are right, this is difficult. I would not want to resolve YES if they get put on leave for a few days during the investigation but then get cleared of everything. This is about negative consequences for them.
So, if the leave is part of routine procedure after a shooting then it doesn't count. If, on the other hand, they are put on leave explicitly as part of a disciplinary measure, it counts
@JoeandSeth Thanks for asking these questions, by the way. I realise I may have thought this through a bit better beforehand
@CommanderKeen ok so this is basically a market for if the ice agent is successfully charged with malfeasance or otherwise found to have gone against ICE policy as a whole?
@JoeandSeth I do not know the specifics of the law, what they could be charged with etc., but if they get charged with a crime, in the context of this shooting, I would resolve YES
