After ICE shootings, 3 simple questions for Kansas Sens. Marshall and Moran | Opinion

An open letter to Sens. Roger Marshall and Jerry Moran:

I am writing to you as a concerned Kansan about the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations now unfolding across our country — and increasingly in our state.

Before I share my concerns, I want to ask you three simple questions.

‘Protection from the government’

Do you support the First Amendment?

I believe you do. Sen. Moran, you’ve warned that “our Constitution provides citizens protection from the government.“ Sen. Marshall, you’ve defended Americans’ right to express their views without government retaliation.

Then explain Alex Pretti.

On Jan. 24, the 37-year-old intensive care nurse at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs hospital was holding his phone — taking video of federal agents — when they confronted him. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara said Pretti was “simply engaging in his legal right to free speech” and “did not start the confrontation with officers.”

A witness stated in federal court filings that Pretti was pepper-sprayed while trying to help a woman who had been shoved by agents. Then they tackled him. Then they shot him.

Within hours — before any investigation — Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller called Pretti a “domestic terrorist” and a “would-be assassin.” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem accused him of “impeding” a federal operation.

But recording law enforcement is constitutionally protected. Helping someone who’s been knocked down is not terrorism.

The message from this administration is clear: If you observe, record or protest near federal agents, you can be labeled a terrorist and killed.

Is that the First Amendment you swore to defend?

‘Shall not be infringed’

Do you support the Second Amendment?

I know you both do. Sen. Marshall, you’re a lifetime National Rifle Association member who has said “’shall not be infringed’ is crystal clear.” Sen. Moran, you’ve pledged to oppose any legislation you consider a threat to gun rights.

Then explain why you’re silent while the administration attacks the Second Amendment to justify killing Alex Pretti.

Pretti was a licensed gun owner with a valid Minnesota permit to carry. His firearm was holstered — video shows he never drew or brandished it during the scuffle. Before his killing, a federal agent reached into his waistband and removed the gun from his holster. Seconds later — after the weapon had already been taken — another agent shot Pretti multiple times in the back.

Then the administration tried to justify it by attacking the victim’s Second Amendment rights.

FBI Director Kash Patel said on national television: “You cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple. You don’t have that right.”

That statement is false. The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus immediately responded: “This is completely incorrect on Minnesota law. There is no prohibition on a permit holder carrying a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines at a protest or rally in Minnesota.”

Even the NRA criticized the administration for condemning Pretti without investigation.

The administration has established a new rule: If you legally carry a firearm near federal agents, you should expect to be shot.

Is that the Second Amendment you’ve spent your careers defending? Or does the Second Amendment protect people only when it’s politically convenient?

Opposed to red flag gun laws

Do you support the Fourth Amendment?

This is where I need your honest answer — because your actions will reveal the truth.

The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

Sen. Marshall, you voted against red flag laws — which allow courts to prevent people who are believed to be a danger to themselves or others from holding firearms — because you said they “are begging to be abused by individuals who do not have a shred of respect for due process.” You warned that “law-abiding Americans would be stripped of their rights” without proper judicial oversight.

How is what ICE is doing any different?

On May 12, 2025, ICE issued a secret internal memo authorizing agents to forcibly enter American homes using only administrative warrants — warrants signed by ICE itself, not by judges. Whistleblowers who disclosed this memo said it “flies in the face of longstanding federal law enforcement training material and policies, all rooted in constitutional assessments.”

We have already seen the results:

• ChongLy “Scott” Thao, a U.S. citizen, was dragged from his Minnesota home in his underwear in sub-zero temperatures — and then released because agents had the wrong person.
• Renee Good, a U.S. citizen, was shot and killed by an ICE agent on Jan. 7.
• Alex Pretti was killed Jan. 24.

Meanwhile, in Kansas, ICE arrests have nearly tripled since January 2025 — and half of those arrested have no criminal conviction. A federal judge ruled ICE arrests at El Potro restaurant in Liberty were unlawful. DHS is now planning a “mega” detention center in Kansas City capable of holding 5,000 to 10,000 people.

The federal government has given itself the power to enter your home without a judge ever reviewing the decision. It is using that power right now.

Senators, you have built your careers on defending constitutional rights against government overreach. That moment is now. The question is whether you meant what you said.

Take action against DHS overreach

I am asking you to:

• Vote against the DHS appropriations bill unless it includes meaningful restrictions: judicial warrants required for home entries, accountability measures for use of force, body camera requirements, transparent investigation of the Good and Pretti shootings, and no funding for the planned Kansas City detention facility.
• Publicly condemn Patel’s statement that Americans “don’t have the right” to carry firearms at protests, and Noem’s accusation that Pretti was “impeding” a federal operation by recording it. Your silence implies agreement.
• Demand an independent investigation into the ICE and Customs and Border Protection shootings of American citizens — conducted by authorities outside DHS, with full access for state investigators.
• Call for DHS to rescind the May 2025 memo authorizing warrantless home entries.

The choice is before you. The Constitution does not have an asterisk. The First Amendment does not say, “except when shooting video of federal agents.” The Second Amendment does not say, “except at protests.” The Fourth Amendment does not say, “except for immigration enforcement.”

You cannot defend the Second Amendment while staying silent as the administration says legal gun owners should expect to be shot. You cannot champion free speech while federal agents kill Americans for recording them. You cannot oppose red flag laws while allowing ICE to sign its own warrants.

Either you believe in constitutional rights for all Americans, or you do not.

I am watching. Kansas is watching. History is watching.

You voted to advance DHS funding without restrictions. The final vote is still ahead.

Your allegiance — to the Constitution or to this administration — will be clear.

Please tell me: Which will you choose?

Cody Dusthimer is an Overland Park resident and a member of the nonpartisan civic engagement 501(c)(4) nonprofit Leading Kansas.