FAC Weekly Update 2026-01-27-Demand Reasoned Fact-Based Policy

Weekly update for January 27, 2026. This is recording number 351

Dear Members and Advocates,

This week in Minnesota, the national spotlight is shining on a series of controversial shootings by federal immigration agents. Last week’s death of ICU nurse Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old VA hospital employee, ignited conflict and controversy. While witnesses contest the administration’s account (and there is significant video evidence and eyewitness testimony supporting them), federal officials, including Department of Homeland Security leadership, came right out of the gate describing Petti as a “domestic terrorist” and suggesting he was out to do “significant harm” to law enforcement. The comments from political leaders echo the characterization of Renee Good, a Minnesota woman shot in a similar incident.

We’re not going to delve into politics or take sides here, but instead, we suggest both sides take a pause, do a thorough investigation of the facts, review all available evidence, and only then come up with conclusions instead of knee-jerking them, automatically calling people domestic terrorists and assuming criminal intent. It’s the same thing we are calling on lawmakers to do when considering HB 45 and SB 212.

When inflammatory labels and presumptions are invoked before facts are independently verified, it creates a narrative that prejudges those involved and tries to justify extreme measures. For example ‘“Sex Offenders need to be kept 200 feet away from bodies of water so they are prevented from abducting and molesting kids” is the narrative Florida lawmakers want the public to believe. But are all those affected by the bill out there sexually offending? Is their universal intention for going to the beach or fishing to abduct a child? Does research suggest this is going to stop “coastal sex crimes”? Will this infringe on rights exercised by the overwhelming majority of others? What does the law and evidence suggest?

Reducing human beings to a label, such as “domestic terrorist,” certainly resonates and helps sell a narrative. That’s because the label carries with it a presumption of danger and stigma. So too does the label “sex offender,” imply a present status of active offending rather than what’s most often a one-time crime within an individual’s full history. Both cases illustrate how starting with the label suggests culpability or threat that can erase nuance, amplify stigma, and tacitly sanction harsher treatment in law and in public perception.

I don’t know whether Alex Pretti and Renee Good were going to take out a bunch of DHS officers and their shootings were justified, or whether they were out there exercising their right to protest. Similarly, Rep. Plakon and Sen. McClain don’t know whether any one of us are going inside an invisible 200 foot buffer zone to molest a kid or for the same harmless purpose we have for years or decades. Doesn’t due process and our system of government demand that we do a thorough investigation of the facts, review all available evidence, and only then come up with conclusions? Certainly, that’s the way our founding fathers envisioned the system should work and those are the rules enshrined in our Constitution. Unfortunately, if the system doesn’t fit the narrative of a government looking for a scapegoat or a politician looking for brownie points, it’s not the way the system actually works.

At the end of the day, whether we are talking about Minnesota or Florida, the lesson is the same: labels do not replace facts, and assumptions do not replace due process. Presumptions of guilt or danger carry real consequences. They stigmatize, they limit rights, and they can justify excessive measures before any thorough investigation or research is conducted. If our laws and our leaders begin with fear and labels instead of evidence, we erode both fairness and the principles our system is meant to uphold. That is why it is imperative for every one of us to demand reasoned, fact-based policy, and to urge our legislators to oppose HB 45 and SB 212 (bills which from their very title, “sexual offenders and sexual predators”, invoke stigma and invite prejudgment), ensuring that legislation examines all the available evidence and let the facts, not labels, guide our understanding.

Sincerely,

The Florida Action Committee