ICE claims a Politico journalist is promoting violence towards federal agents.

ICE Criticizes Politico Reporter for Inciting Violence

ICE has accused Politico reporter Josh Gerstein of “inciting violence against federal officers” after a post he made on X on Monday night. In that post, Gerstein seemed to suggest that “amateur door-knocking efforts” at day care centers in Minnesota might conflict with what ICE inaccurately described as the state’s “robust self-assertion law.”

On Tuesday, ICE responded harshly to Gerstein’s comments, implying that someone in his position should avoid making social media posts that could potentially provoke violence against federal workers, stating, “POLITICO’s ‘senior legal reporter’ would think it wiser than to tweet something that incited violence against federal officers.”

Concerns Over Child Care Fraud

Gerstein’s remarks appeared linked to a viral investigation by independent journalist Nick Shirley, who alleged significant fraud in Minnesota’s child care sector. In a lengthy video, Shirley claimed that funding was being funneled to various child care centers, many of which seemed inactive.

After his original post drew backlash, Gerstein sought to clarify his statement, asserting that merely observing a potential outcome or risk doesn’t constitute a call for violence. He expressed that his comments weren’t a call to action against journalists, but that interpretation didn’t sit well with everyone.

Some users on X criticized him for implying that violence against those investigating fraud was acceptable, describing his wording as “veiled” to evade legal consequences. Others pointed out a lack of understanding regarding the differences between various self-defense laws in Minnesota, noting that the Castle Doctrine does not apply outside one’s home.

Public Reactions and Clarifications

WTB radio host Pete Culliner remarked that legal reporters should recognize the distinctions between different types of laws as neither Stand Your Ground laws nor the Castle Doctrine applies to someone merely knocking on a business door.

A community note later clarified Gerstein’s post, stating that the Stand Resolute Act does not obligate retreating from threats in legally occupied spaces, and that someone knocking on a public business’s door does not represent a threat that would invoke defensive laws.