Part 1: The Silencing Pattern - When US Federal Agents Target American Women
- Ash A Milton
- Jan 8
- 22 min read
Updated: Jan 10
I am what DHS ICE and CBP fear - a woman who defies the patriarchy. Women will not be silenced.
This is a Four-Part Investigation into Immigration Enforcement, Authoritarian Tactics, and the Targeting of Women's Voices
This is Part 1 of a four-part series examining patterns of force against U.S. citizen women by federal immigration agents, the demographics and culture of rapidly expanded enforcement agencies, historical parallels to authoritarian suppression of women's political participation, and the synthesis of these concerning trends.
Introduction: A Pattern Emerges
Between September 2025 and January 2026, a disturbing pattern has emerged in federal immigration enforcement operations: U.S. citizen women—particularly those engaged in observation, protest, or simply existing in proximity to ICE and CBP operations—have been shot, dragged, arrested, detained for hours without notification to family, and subjected to use of force that local officials who reviewed evidence have called unjustified or based on false pretenses.
This article documents these incidents in detail. But it also asks a more unsettling question:
Is the targeting of American women who dare to observe, question, or resist federal authority an intentional feature of current enforcement strategy rather than incidental collateral damage?
The women profiled here were not breaking the law. They were playing music at protests, standing on sidewalks observing law enforcement, driving to work in medical scrubs, photographing government vehicles in public spaces. They are U.S. citizens with constitutional rights. Yet they were shot in the face, dragged face-down across snow, had wedding rings forcibly removed, were held for hours without their families knowing their whereabouts, and were transported across state lines to detention facilities.
When a clarinet player, a Rotary Club president, and a mother driving her car can all be subjected to federal force that local officials call excessive or based on lies, we must consider whether we are witnessing not merely enforcement failures but a systematic effort to silence women who resist.
This article is the first in a series that will explore:
The documented cases of U.S. citizen women subjected to federal force (this article)
The demographics and culture of the 12,000 agents hired in ICE's 2025 surge
Historical precedents: how authoritarian regimes have used state violence to silence women's political participation
The synthesis: connecting these patterns to assess whether American women are being deliberately targeted for silencing
Part 1: The Silencing Pattern - When Federal Agents Target American Women
A Four-Part Investigation into Immigration Enforcement, Authoritarian Tactics, and the Targeting of Women's Voices
This is Part 1 of a four-part series examining patterns of force against U.S. citizen women by federal immigration agents, the demographics and culture of rapidly expanded enforcement agencies, historical parallels to authoritarian suppression of women's political participation, and the synthesis of these concerning trends.
Introduction: A Pattern Emerges
Between September 2025 and January 2026, a disturbing pattern has emerged in federal immigration enforcement operations: U.S. citizen women—particularly those engaged in observation, protest, or simply existing in proximity to ICE and CBP operations—have been shot, dragged, arrested, detained for hours without notification to family, and subjected to use of force that local officials who reviewed evidence have called unjustified or based on false pretenses.
This article documents these incidents in detail. But it also asks a more unsettling question: Is the targeting of American women who dare to observe, question, or resist federal authority an intentional feature of current enforcement strategy rather than incidental collateral damage?
The women profiled here were not breaking the law. They were playing music at protests, standing on sidewalks observing law enforcement, driving to work in medical scrubs, photographing government vehicles in public spaces. They are U.S. citizens with constitutional rights. Yet they were shot in the face, dragged face-down across snow, had wedding rings forcibly removed, were held for hours without their families knowing their whereabouts, and were transported across state lines to detention facilities.
When a clarinet player, a Rotary Club president, and a mother driving her car can all be subjected to federal force that local officials call excessive or based on lies, we must consider whether we are witnessing not merely enforcement failures but a systematic effort to silence women who resist.
This article is the first in a series that will explore:
The documented cases of U.S. citizen women subjected to federal force (this article)
The demographics and culture of the 12,000 agents hired in ICE's 2025 surge
Historical precedents: how authoritarian regimes have used state violence to silence women's political participation
The synthesis: connecting these patterns to assess whether American women are being deliberately targeted for silencing
A Call to Women Who Have Experienced Federal Force
If you are one of the unidentified women in this article, or if you are a U.S. citizen woman who has been mistreated by ICE or CBP agents and believe it was part of a pattern to silence you—please leave a comment below.
Your story matters. Your testimony matters. Your voice matters.
The federal government wants you to stay silent. They want you to be afraid. They want you to believe you are alone.
You are not alone.
Every woman who speaks adds to the documented pattern. Every story told makes it harder for federal officials to claim these are isolated incidents. Every voice raised makes it clearer that this is systematic.
If you have been:
Shot at or shot by federal agents
Dragged from your vehicle
Detained without charges
Held for hours without your family knowing where you were
Had your property confiscated (phone, rings, identification)
Subjected to force while observing or documenting federal operations
Transported across state lines
Threatened, intimidated, or assaulted by ICE or CBP agents
Part I: The Dead
Renee Nicole Good: Shot in the Face While Not a Target
Minneapolis, Minnesota - January 7, 2026
Renee Nicole Good, 37, was a U.S. citizen, a mother, and not the target of the ICE operation that killed her. She was shot in the face by an ICE agent on Portland Avenue in south Minneapolis, less than a mile from where George Floyd was murdered.
The Federal Narrative:
The Department of Homeland Security, through Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, immediately characterized Good's actions as "domestic terrorism," claiming she "weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers." DHS Secretary Kristi Noem described it as justified self-defense.
The Evidence-Based Counter-Narrative:
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey reviewed the video evidence personally. His assessment: "Having seen the video myself, I want to tell everybody directly that is bull****."
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was equally direct, telling residents not to believe what he called "this propaganda machine."
Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara noted concerns about "a shooting into a vehicle of someone who's not armed."
Eyewitness Account:
Aidan Perzana witnessed the shooting. His description contradicts federal claims: As Good attempted to move forward, "one of the ICE agents stepped in front of her vehicle and reached across the hood and fired his weapon about three or four times and shot her in the face."
Video footage reviewed by multiple news organizations showed several feet of clearance between Good's SUV and the ICE agent when shots were fired. No agents were struck. All remained standing.
The Accountability Blackout:
Initially, both the FBI and Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) were to jointly investigate. Then the BCA was removed. BCA Superintendent Drew Evans stated his agency was told it "would no longer have access to the case materials, scene evidence or investigative interviews necessary to complete a thorough and independent investigation."
The FBI now has sole investigative authority over the killing of a woman local officials say was not a threat.
Analysis:
A U.S. citizen woman who was not the target of enforcement was killed. Federal officials immediately called it terrorism and self-defense. Local officials who reviewed video evidence called federal claims false. State investigators were then barred from the investigation.
Renee Nicole Good cannot speak for herself. The federal government controls the narrative and the evidence. This is how silencing works when it ends in death.
Part II: The Wounded
Marimar Martinez: Seven Holes from Five Shots, Charges Dropped
Chicago, Illinois - October 4, 2025
Marimar Martinez, 30, is a U.S. citizen. CBP agent Charles Exum shot her five times. The bullets made seven holes in her body. Federal prosecutors initially charged her with attempting to ram agents' vehicles and endangering officers.
Then the evidence emerged.
What the Body Camera Showed:
Defense attorney Christopher Parente stated that body camera footage showed an agent carrying an assault rifle saying "Do something, b**ch" before the shooting began.
What the Agent Texted:
After shooting Martinez, Agent Exum sent bragging text messages to fellow agents:
"I fired 5 shots and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book boys"
He sent links to news coverage with "Read it"
He indicated he was ready for another "round of f*** around and find out"
The Evidence Destruction:
Agent Exum drove the federal Tahoe involved in the shooting over 1,000 miles back to Maine, where it was repaired and cleaned before the defense could inspect it—potential destruction of crucial physical evidence.
The Case Collapses:
On November 20, 2025, federal prosecutors moved to dismiss all charges against Martinez "with prejudice"—meaning they cannot be refiled. At the hearing, defense attorney Parente stated: "These agents were lying about what happened. Ms. Martinez never rammed anybody. These agents hit Ms. Martinez."
DHS Response:
Despite prosecutors dropping charges because agents lied, DHS doubled down, maintaining that agents had been "ambushed by domestic terrorists."
Analysis:
Martinez was shot seven times by an agent who bragged about it in text messages and said "Do something, bitch" before opening fire. Prosecutors dropped charges because agents lied. Yet DHS still calls her a domestic terrorist.
A woman with seven bullet holes in her body is not the perpetrator. She is the victim. But the federal government insists she attacked them, even after their own prosecutors couldn't sustain that fiction in court.
Dayanne Figueroa: Car Rammed, Dragged by Legs Through the Street
Chicago, Illinois - October 10, 2025
Dayanne Figueroa is a U.S. citizen, a mother to a six-year-old son, and a paralegal. She was driving to work when she encountered a chaotic scene in West Town: heavily armed, masked federal agents making arrests on a residential street. People were yelling, horns were honking—signals now used to alert neighbors that federal immigration agents are in the area.
Figueroa had undergone kidney surgery just two months earlier, in August 2025.
What Federal Agents Did:
As Figueroa attempted to drive past the scene, an unmarked vehicle driven by federal agents collided with her car. Multiple videos reviewed by the Chicago Tribune show the agents' vehicle struck hers as they tried to speed away from a hostile crowd.
Federal agents then exited the unmarked vehicle and pointed guns at Figueroa. They forcibly opened her car door and pulled her out by her legs, dragging her through the street.
They did not identify themselves as law enforcement.
They did not tell her she was under arrest.
They did not tell her what she had done wrong.
They did not tell her family where they were taking her.
Bystanders shouted: "You hit her! You hit her car!"
The Hours of Not Knowing:
For hours, Figueroa's family desperately searched for her. They called police. They called hospitals. They called anyone who might know where masked men had taken their daughter, their mother, their loved one.
Only after coming across a video circulating online did they realize she had been taken by federal agents. They were able to locate her by pinging her iPhone at the ICE processing center in Broadview.
Her mother, Teresita Figueroa, was "desperately worried." The way agents pulled Dayanne from the vehicle and threw her on the ground "deeply concerned me," she told the Tribune, especially knowing her daughter had just recovered from major surgery.
"Of Course She Resisted":
Figueroa's attorney, Michael Hogan, noted what should be obvious to anyone: "Of course she resisted. She did nothing wrong. They never told her why they were taking her. They came at her with guns. She was scared."
A woman recovering from kidney surgery, dragged from her car by masked men with guns who had just rammed her vehicle, responded with fear and resistance. This is a normal human response to being attacked.
The Police Report:
Chicago police confirmed they took a traffic report from Figueroa. In that report, she stated her car was sideswiped by a Jeep she attempted to pass. The federal vehicle hit her. Not the other way around.
No injuries were officially reported in the police report—though one wonders whether anyone asked a woman who'd been dragged through the street by her legs, two months after kidney surgery, if she was injured.
The Outcome:
Figueroa was released hours later. No charges were filed. Because there was no crime.
Analysis:
Federal agents rammed a U.S. citizen's car with their unmarked vehicle. When she attempted to continue driving—a reasonable response when an unmarked vehicle hits you and you don't know who these people are—they dragged her from her car by her legs.
A woman recovering from kidney surgery was pulled from her vehicle by her legs and dragged through the street like an object, like cargo, like something less than human.
Her six-year-old son waited for his mother to come home from work. Her family searched desperately for hours, not knowing if she was alive, not knowing where masked men had taken her, not knowing if they would ever see her again.
And when she was finally released, no charges were filed. Because the only crime committed that day was federal agents ramming her car, pointing guns at her, dragging her by her legs through a public street, and disappearing her from her family for hours.
But federal agents don't get charged. Women do. Or they would have, if there had been anything to charge her with.
Part III: The Observers and Protesters
Sue Tincher: Wedding Ring Cut Off, Detained Five Hours Without Notification
Minneapolis, Minnesota - December 9, 2025
Sue Tincher is 55 years old. She is a U.S. citizen, co-president of her local Rotary Club, and a grandmother. She committed the crime of standing on a sidewalk and refusing to move when ICE agents told her to.
What Happened:
At approximately 6:30 a.m., Tincher received alerts that ICE was conducting operations in her north Minneapolis neighborhood. She walked to the scene and asked an officer if they were ICE. When told to move back, she refused to leave the public sidewalk.
Within seconds, according to multiple witnesses and video footage, agents threw her to the ground, handcuffed her, and placed her in an unmarked vehicle.
The Five-Hour Ordeal:
During her detention at the Whipple Federal Building:
Agents threatened to pepper spray her in the transport vehicle if she didn't "behave"
She was placed in leg shackles
Agents cut off her wedding ring
She sustained marks on her neck and wrist from restraints
Her husband spent the entire day trying to locate her, requiring assistance from Rep. Ilhan Omar and Sen. Tina Smith to find where federal agents were holding his wife
Federal Claims:
DHS claimed Tincher "assaulted a federal agent, tried to break through a security perimeter set up for public safety, ignored lawful commands, and became violent."
Video Evidence:
Video reviewed by multiple local news outlets showed Tincher being restrained by three officers while she called for help. The video did not corroborate federal claims of violence on her part.
The Message:
Tincher was released without charges after five hours. She stated afterward: "I'm just so concerned about our neighbors, our peaceable neighbors, being abducted, and the worries their families are going through."
Analysis:
A 55-year-old Rotary Club president stood on a sidewalk—activity firmly protected by the First Amendment as observation of law enforcement. For this, she was thrown to the ground, shackled, had her wedding ring forcibly removed, and detained for five hours without her family knowing where she was.
The removal of the wedding ring is particularly significant. Wedding rings are symbols of commitment, family, and identity. Forcibly cutting one off is both practically unnecessary (rings can remain on during brief detention) and symbolically powerful: you are stripped of your identity markers. You are silenced. You are removed from your family. You do not belong to them anymore—you belong to us.
Sue Tincher's body, for five hours, was federal property. Her voice was silenced. Her family was kept in the dark. And she was released without charges because she had committed no crime.
The point was not prosecution. The point was the lesson: observe us, and this is what happens.
Oriana Korol: The Clarinet Player Transported Across State Lines
Portland, Oregon - October 12, 2025
Oriana Korol, 38, is a clarinet player with the Unpresidented Brass Band, a group that performs at protests to create what they describe as a "joyful spirit" and de-escalate tensions. She is a U.S. citizen.
The Arrest:
According to multiple witnesses, federal agents were chasing another protester when they collided with band members, most wearing banana costumes. Band founder Miles Thompson stated: "Ori, our clarinet player, was pinned against this fence, with whoever they're trying to detain at her feet, and she's just kind of stuck. Then suddenly one of the other officers just tackled her."
Video footage showed Korol face-down in mud with her clarinet beside her.
Transported Across State Lines:
Korol was charged with assaulting a federal officer and transported to Clark County Jail in Washington state—across state lines from where she was arrested in Oregon. Her family did not know her whereabouts for hours. She was held without bail initially.
Her 3-year-old child asked when they would see mommy again.
Korol faces felony charges carrying an 8-year sentence for playing the clarinet at a protest.
Analysis:
Music is protest. Protest is speech. Speech is protected by the First Amendment.
A woman with a clarinet was tackled, arrested, transported across state lines, held without bail, separated from her young child, and charged with a felony carrying eight years in prison.
The clarinet is not a weapon. The banana costume is not threatening. The "joyful spirit" of brass band music is not violence.
But a woman using her voice—through her instrument, through her presence, through her resistance—must be silenced. She must be removed. She must be taught that using your platform, even a musical one, to oppose federal action will result in separation from your child and potential years in prison.
This is how you silence a generation of women who might consider resisting.
Berenice Garcia-Hernandez: Photographing in Public
Gresham, Oregon - October 2025
Berenice Garcia-Hernandez, 25, is a U.S. citizen. She photographed ICE agents' vehicles in a Chick-fil-A parking lot—activity firmly protected by the First Amendment.
What Followed:
ICE agents followed her, broke out her car windows, dragged her from the vehicle, and detained her for approximately seven hours before releasing her without charges.
Two weeks later, ICE still retained her cell phone and engagement ring.
Federal Justification:
DHS claimed Garcia-Hernandez had been "aggressively following and obstructing ICE officers."
Legal Reality:
Photographing law enforcement in public is constitutionally protected activity. Her attorney noted this explicitly.
Analysis:
A 25-year-old woman used her phone to photograph government vehicles in a public parking lot. For this, agents broke her windows, dragged her from her car, detained her for seven hours, took her phone and engagement ring, and held those items for weeks after releasing her without charges.
The phone contained her photos—evidence. The engagement ring was a symbol of her future, her identity, her commitment to someone.
Both were taken. Both were held. She was released, but pieces of her life and her ability to document what she witnessed were retained by the government.
You can observe us, the message says, but we will take your tools of observation. We will take your symbols of identity. And we will hold them as long as we want, because you dared to watch.
Minneapolis, Minnesota - December 15, 2025
Viral video showed an ICE agent dragging a woman face-down across snow-covered pavement in south Minneapolis near Karmel Mall. Witnesses claimed the woman was pregnant (unconfirmed) and couldn't breathe as an agent kneeled on her back.
Federal Claims:
DHS claimed the woman "rushed an ICE vehicle and attempted to vandalize it" and that protesters threw rocks and ice at officers.
Witness Accounts:
Witnesses disputed this account, stating agents were aggressive from the beginning and that snowballs were only thrown after agents began dragging the woman.
Analysis:
A woman's face was dragged across frozen pavement while an agent kneeled on her back—in the same city where George Floyd was killed by an officer kneeling on his back.
Whether she was pregnant or not, whether she rushed a vehicle or not, the image is clear: a woman, face-down, being dragged across snow by a federal agent while unable to breathe.
This is what happens to women who are present when federal agents decide force is necessary. This is what resistance looks like on a woman's body: scraped across ice, unable to breathe, held down by the weight of federal authority.
Florida Medical Worker: "I'm a U.S. Citizen, Please Help Me"
Key Largo, Florida - December 3, 2025
Video footage showed a woman wearing medical scrubs pulled from her car on a busy highway in Key Largo. She was screaming "I'm a U.S. citizen, please help me" as agents forced her to the ground and handcuffed her.
The Justification:
CBP stated the woman refused to provide her driver's license and roll down her window.
The Reality:
After searching her car, agents found her license and confirmed she was a U.S. citizen. She was then released.
Analysis:
A woman in medical scrubs—a healthcare worker—was dragged from her car on a public highway and restrained by federal agents because she didn't immediately roll down her window.
She screamed for help. She stated her citizenship. She was terrified.
And she was right to be terrified, because being a U.S. citizen did not protect her from being thrown to the ground on a public highway in front of other drivers.
The message to other women: your citizenship papers will not save you if you hesitate, if you question, if you do not immediately comply. You can be pulled from your car. You can be restrained. You can scream "I'm a U.S. citizen" and it will not matter until after they have searched your vehicle and verified that you are telling the truth.
Innocent until proven guilty does not apply to women who do not instantly obey.
Santa Ana Community Watch Member: Gun Pointed for Recording
Santa Ana, California - November 9, 2025
A woman who is a community watch member was documenting ICE operations in her own neighborhood. For this constitutionally protected activity, an ICE agent pointed a gun at her.
The Incident:
At approximately 12:18 p.m., at the intersection of Santa Ana Boulevard and Shelton Street, a Fullerton Police officer witnessed something disturbing: a plainclothes man had exited his vehicle and was pointing a firearm at a female driver in the car behind him.
The officer immediately stopped to intervene. He didn't know who the armed man was or what was happening. The man identified himself as an ICE agent, presented credentials, and explained that the woman had been "following and recording" him.
What the Video Shows:
Video posted to social media captured the encounter. The ICE agent approaches the woman's vehicle with his gun held near his chest, pointed directly at her. The woman, still in her car, can be heard confronting him:
"What are you doing? What the f*** is your problem?"
The agent responds: "You can't be following us like that."
The woman's voice rises: "I live here! It's okay to pull your gun on a woman? What the f*?"**
I live here.
Three words that capture everything about this moment. This is her neighborhood. These are her streets. This is her community. And she has every constitutional right to document what happens on her streets, in her community, in her neighborhood.
The Police Officer's Response:
The Fullerton Police officer, having assessed the situation, delivered a clear message to the ICE agent: he could not assist with someone following or recording the agent if no crime had occurred.
No crime had occurred.
The officer told the agent that local law enforcement from Santa Ana was en route. The woman left shortly after. The Fullerton officer reiterated his position—he would not assist if no crime had been committed—and then left the scene.
The Federal Lies:
DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin immediately spun a different narrative. She claimed the woman "screamed at the officer and tried to cause a collision" and that the ICE agent had properly "followed their training" by drawing his weapon in response to "the aggression of the driver and her refusal to follow law enforcement commands."
But here's what actually happened, according to the police officer who was physically present at the scene: no crime had occurred.
Recording law enforcement officers in public is constitutionally protected First Amendment activity. Following a government vehicle on public streets is legal. Documenting federal operations in your own neighborhood is not a crime.
The Police Department's Stand:
The Fullerton Police Department issued a public statement clarifying their position. While they will assist federal law enforcement with "situations involving immediate officer safety," they "has not and will not participate in immigration enforcement efforts." California's Senate Bill 54 prohibits local law enforcement from participating in immigration enforcement.
DHS spokesperson McLaughlin attacked this stance, claiming the Fullerton officer "declined to help our law enforcement, stating it was an immigration matter. This is just another example of sanctuary policies undermining public safety by promoting lawlessness."
Analysis:
Let's be very clear about what happened here:
A woman was driving in her own neighborhood. She said so herself: "I live here!" She was recording ICE agents operating on public streets. This is activity protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
For this, an ICE agent pointed a gun at her.
The local police officer who witnessed the incident stated explicitly that no crime had occurred. He refused to assist the federal agent in intimidating a woman for exercising her constitutional rights. He told the agent this to his face. Then he left, making clear that local law enforcement would not participate in threatening residents for documenting federal operations.
The woman was not arrested. She was not charged. She was allowed to leave. Because she committed no crime.
If DHS's version of events were true—if she had actually tried to cause a collision, if she had actually been aggressive and refused lawful commands—she would have been arrested on the spot. But she wasn't. Because even the ICE agent, standing there with his gun pointed at her, knew he had no legal basis to detain her.
Part IV: Critical Analysis - The Silencing Thesis
Pattern Recognition: What These Cases Share
Every woman profiled in this article is a U.S. citizen. Every woman was engaged in constitutionally protected activity or simply existing in public space. Every woman experienced federal force. And in multiple cases, federal narratives were contradicted by video evidence, witness testimony, or the government's own decision to drop charges.
Common elements:
Immediate escalation to physical force - No de-escalation, no proportional response
Federal narratives contradicted by evidence - Local officials, video footage, dropped charges
Separation from family without notification - Hours of not knowing where detained women were held
Removal of identity markers - Wedding rings cut off, engagement rings confiscated, phones missing
Transport away from communities - Across state lines, to distant facilities
Symbolic violence - Face-down in mud, dragged across snow, shot in the face
Constitutional rights ignored - First Amendment observation, Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable seizure
The Silencing Hypothesis
I propose that these incidents are not random, nor are they merely the result of inadequate training or individual agent misconduct. Instead, they represent a pattern of deliberately targeting women—particularly U.S. citizen women who observe, question, or resist federal authority—for violent suppression designed to silence not only these specific women but to send a message to all women who might consider similar resistance.
The evidence for this hypothesis includes:
1. Disproportionate Impact: While men are certainly also subjected to ICE and CBP force, the cases documented here show women subjected to particularly degrading forms of violence—face-down in mud, dragged across snow, wedding rings forcibly removed, separated from young children, shot in the face while not even the target.
2. Targeting of Observers: Multiple women were engaged specifically in observation or documentation—Sue Tincher watching from a sidewalk, Berenice Garcia-Hernandez photographing vehicles, the Florida medical worker on a public highway. Observation is the first step of resistance. If you cannot see what is happening, you cannot oppose it. Silencing observers silences potential future resistance.
3. Symbolic Violence: The removal of wedding rings, the separation from children, the face-down positioning, the dragging—these are not merely incidental to restraint. They are symbolic acts that communicate dominance, humiliation, and the message that your identity as a woman with family, with commitments, with dignity, is meaningless in the face of federal authority.
4. Narrative Control: Even when forced to drop charges, even when local officials call federal claims false, DHS continues to insist these women were violent, were terrorists, were threats. The narrative must be maintained that women who resist are dangerous, regardless of evidence.
5. Impunity: Agents brag in text messages about shooting women. Agents drive vehicles across the country to have them cleaned before defense inspection. State investigators are removed from cases. Agents face no consequences—not when prosecutors drop charges, not when mayors call their claims false, not when they kill women who weren't even targets.
Why Women? Why Now?
This question will be explored more fully in the subsequent articles in this series, but preliminary analysis suggests several intersecting factors:
Historical Precedent: Authoritarian regimes throughout history have recognized that women's political participation, women's observation of state violence, and women's resistance are particularly dangerous to consolidating power. Women build community networks. Women organize. Women bear witness. Silencing women is strategically valuable.
Cultural Backlash: The rapid expansion of ICE enforcement has occurred during a period of intense cultural conflict over women's roles, women's bodily autonomy, women's political power. The 12,000 agents hired in 2025 were recruited during a specific cultural moment—this will be examined in Part 2.
Enforcement Culture: The culture of the enforcement agencies themselves, the recruitment messaging, the training (reduced from six months to six weeks), the types of individuals attracted to rapid hiring surges with minimal vetting—all of this contributes to who is doing the enforcing and how they view resistance, particularly from women.
Strategic Intimidation: Women engaged in observation and documentation are specifically dangerous to operations that depend on operating without oversight. A 55-year-old grandmother with a cell phone is more threatening to illegitimate operations than a man throwing a snowball, because she will remember, she will document, she will testify, she will organize.
Part V: What Comes Next
This article has documented the cases. The evidence is clear: U.S. citizen women engaged in constitutionally protected activities have been subjected to federal force that local officials, prosecutors, and witnesses have repeatedly characterized as excessive, unjustified, or based on false federal narratives.
The upcoming articles in this series will explore:
Part 2: Inside the Surge - Who Are the 12,000 New Agents? This article will examine the demographics, recruitment strategies, training shortcuts, and cultural context of ICE's unprecedented 120% workforce expansion in 2025. Who responded to recruitment ads offering $50,000 signing bonuses? What kind of training did they receive when programs were shortened from six months to six weeks? What culture exists within online spaces where potential recruits gather? What is the "red pill manosphere" and what does it teach about women, resistance, and authority?
Part 3: Historical Parallels - The Authoritarian Playbook for Silencing Women This article will examine how authoritarian regimes throughout history—with particular focus on Nazi Germany's systematic exclusion of women from political life beginning in 1933—have used state violence, legal restrictions, and cultural messaging to silence women's political participation. We will explore the progression from restriction to violence, the strategic value of targeting women specifically, and the long-term effects of successful silencing campaigns.
Part 4: Synthesis - Are American Women Being Deliberately Targeted for Silencing? The final article will synthesize findings from the first three parts to assess whether the patterns documented represent deliberate targeting. We will examine the intersection of: (a) specific violent acts against U.S. citizen women, (b) the culture and demographics of rapidly expanded enforcement agencies, and (c) historical precedents for using state violence to silence women's political participation. We will consider alternative explanations and weigh the evidence for intentionality versus systemic negligence.
Conclusion: The Women Who Dared
Renee Nicole Good dared to drive through her own neighborhood. She is dead.
Marimar Martinez dared to be present during an ICE operation. She has seven bullet holes in her body from an agent who bragged about shooting her.
Sue Tincher dared to stand on a public sidewalk and observe law enforcement. Her wedding ring was cut from her finger.
Oriana Korol dared to play music at a protest. She faces eight years in prison, separated from her child.
Berenice Garcia-Hernandez dared to photograph government vehicles in public. Her engagement ring and phone were confiscated.
Women across the country have dared to observe, to document, to question, to resist. And they have been met with bullets, with broken windows, with separation from children, with hours of detention without notification, with being dragged face-down across snow and mud.
This is not random. This is not incidental. This is a pattern.
And patterns have purposes.
The question we must now ask is: What is the purpose of silencing American women who dare to witness federal power?
The subsequent articles in this series will help answer that question by examining who is doing the silencing, what historical precedents exist for this kind of systematic targeting, and whether we are witnessing the early stages of an authoritarian silencing campaign against women's political participation in America.
Because if we are, then every woman who reads this must understand: You are not safe from federal force simply because you are a citizen. You are not safe because you are engaged in constitutionally protected activity. You are not safe because you are a grandmother, a mother, a musician, a healthcare worker.
You are only safe if you are silent.
And silence is what they want.
Will you give it to them? No! We must be strong together.
This article is based on reporting from The Washington Post, NBC News, CBS News, NPR, The Marshall Project, CNN, Chicago Tribune, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Oregon Public Broadcasting, Sahan Journal, and other news sources, as well as court records and official statements from federal, state, and local officials. All factual claims regarding specific incidents are supported by multiple independent sources.
Coming in Part 2: Inside the Surge - Who Are the 12,000 New Agents? An examination of ICE's unprecedented hiring campaign, training shortcuts, recruitment demographics, and the cultural context of online spaces where enforcement culture is shaped.
Please share your story in the comments.
You do not need to use your real name if you fear retaliation. But your account, even anonymous, becomes part of the permanent record. It becomes evidence. It becomes ammunition for those fighting for accountability.
They want your silence. Give them your voice instead.
Comments