The following is a lightly edited transcript of the January 9 episode of the Daily Blast podcast. Listen to it here.

Greg Sargent: This is The Daily Blast from The New Republic, produced and presented by the DSR Network. I’m your host, Greg Sargent.

MAGA’s response to the awful killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis has truly gone off the rails. Top MAGA figures and Republicans are unrepentant about it in every way. Yet at the same time, powerful new video analyses from news organizations show clearly that the shooting was, at an absolute minimum, unjustified. We think Democrats will now have to fundamentally alter their stance toward ICE and Trump as a result. And we’re talking about this with two Democrats, Representatives Eric Swalwell of California and Dan Goldman of New York, who are introducing a new measure to rein in ICE. We’re going to get into all this. Congressmen, thanks for coming on.

Congressman Eric Swalwell: Of course.

Congressman Dan Goldman: Yeah, thank you for having us, Greg.

Sargent: Well, I want to start with some responses from MAGA figures. There’s JD Vance:

JD Vance (voiceover): Look, there’s a part of me that feels very, very sad for this woman, not just because she lost her life, but because I think she is a victim of left-wing ideology. What young mother shows up and decides they’re going to throw their car in front of ICE officers who are enforcing legitimate law? You’ve got to be a little brainwashed.

Sargent: Vance also said:

JD Vance (voiceover): You have a woman who aimed her car at a law enforcement officer and pressed on the accelerator. Nobody debates that. I can believe that her death is a tragedy while also recognizing that it’s a tragedy of her own making.

Sargent: There’s Randy Fine, who said:

Randy Fine (voiceover): It’s time for Americans to say enough. And if you get in the way of the government repelling a foreign invasion, you’re going to end up just like that lady did yesterday.

Sargent: Congressman Swalwell, you want to respond to all that?

Swalwell: Renee Good was a mom of three kids. And if you looked at her glove compartment, which has been photographed and shared, you don’t see a weapon, you don’t see a knife, you don’t see a gun. You see what we as parents call “stuffies,” stuffed animals. You see a little cup of Cheerios. She’s not a domestic terrorist. She was there to hold to account and bear witness to the atrocities that ICE is committing in our communities. And she should be alive today.

Instead, Donald Trump has sent these mother-murdering thugs into our community. And of course this is what was gonna happen, because it started with putting ICE in the streets and then deporting a six-year-old, Stage 4 cancer victim, U.S. citizen, dragging women by their hair. Those, apparently, were the lucky ones when you look at what happened to Ms. Good.

Sargent: Representatives Swalwell and Goldman will introduce a new bill called the ICE OUT Act, which will end qualified immunity for ICE agents. Congressman Goldman, can you describe what this bill would do and why it’s needed right now?

Goldman: Yeah, basically what the officer is going to say would be that, I personally, subjectively, myself believed that she was driving her car right at me and using her car to try to run me over, and therefore I had to shoot her in self-defense. And because the standard is subjective and it allows for the officer’s own view to carry a lot of weight, it will be very difficult for him to be prosecuted with the current status of qualified immunity.

So what this bill does is only for civil enforcement officers—not criminal enforcement officers who are dealing with real bad guys, not moms driving cars. It would say that it’s an objective test. And if you are acting completely outside of your duties and responsibilities, you don’t have immunity from a civil lawsuit and you don’t have a defense from a criminal charge.

Sargent: OK, I want to break that down a little bit more. So one piece of this is that it removes the protection against lawsuits from victims who allege that their constitutional rights were violated. That’s one piece, yes?

Swalwell: Yes, it’s very hard today with qualified immunity to bring a civil action against somebody who has that immunity.

Sargent: OK, the second piece of this is more complicated. If they thought they were doing what they needed to do to execute federal law, they’re generally protected from prosecution. You guys are trying to remove that........

© New Republic