Shumita Basu

She's otherwise not appeared for a routine oversight hearing.

Three days after the fatal shooting, calls for accountability for the federal agents who shot Alex Preddy and Renee Good on January 7th are getting louder.

Earlier this month, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz encouraged residents of the state to document federal immigration operations, pledging that accountability would come for officers who abuse their powers.

It turns out there aren't many easy roads to do that.

Jack Queen is a legal affairs correspondent for Reuters.

He told us they don't have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution or civil lawsuits, as President Trump has suggested, but they do have something called qualified immunity.

Queen said that's to insulate federal agents from any kind of state-level interference in their work.

Should Minnesota decide to charge any of these federal officers, those agents could seek to move their cases to federal court and argue they are immune to prosecution because their actions were in the line of duty.

That presents another hurdle for state prosecutors.

Outside of Minnesota, a federal case against these officers is also unlikely.

Queen says the DOJ has so far shown no interest in bringing these officers up on charges and has defended their actions, saying they shot Pretty and Good in self-defense.

The Qualified Immunity Legal Doctrine was formalized by the Supreme Court nearly 60 years ago and was originally meant to protect government employees from frivolous lawsuits.

Reuters, in a 2020 investigation, found it's since become a powerful tool for shielding officers, particularly in cases involving potential use of excessive force.

The precedent it has created would also likely apply to the officers involved in the Pretty and Good shootings.

The Department of Homeland Security is leading the investigation into the recent fatal shootings supported by the FBI.

Yesterday, the administration said body cam footage of Pretty's death does exist and is being reviewed.

Today, a landmark trial begins that will ask a jury to consider the question, are social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube and TikTok dangerously addictive for kids?

It's the first test case in a wave of lawsuits being brought by parents and their teenage children, and it could pose major challenges for some of the world's biggest tech companies and force executives like Mark Zuckerberg to testify.

The argument from these families is one you'll have heard before, that because of these platforms' interactive tools and features, teenagers couldn't turn away and developed mental health problems through their continued use.

Naomi Nix is a reporter with The Washington Post.