Federal investigators are reportedly investigating ICE shooting victim Renee Good's possible connections with activist groups protesting President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown.

FBI investigators - who have kicked local police off of the probe and are now leading it - have said they are conducting a thorough inquiry into the fatal shooting, including an analysis of the actions Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross took as well as physical evidence like the handgun used to kill Good.

Those familiar with the investigation reportedly told The New York Times that the civil rights division of the Department of Justice, which typically investigates police-involved shootings, has not opened a probe into whether Ross violated Good's rights under federal law.

Ross is 'increasingly unlikely' to face criminal charges, the Times reported.

Instead, the Justice Department is reportedly planning to look into a wide group of activists who took part in a Minneapolis neighborhood ICE watch activities, believing they were 'instigators' of the shooting.

It remains unclear whether Good, a 37-year-old mother-of-three, was involved in any activism in Minneapolis besides participating in the protest against ICE actions on the day that she was killed - however the FBI is reportedly determined to find out.

Witnesses have said Good and her wife, Rebecca, were acting as legal observers and filming the protest.

In harrowing footage from the scene, Rebecca admitted she encouraged Good to confront agents. 'I made her come down here, it's my fault,' she cried. 

Friends, though, have claimed Good became involved in activism through her six-year-old son's charter school and its local 'ICE Watch group,' which is a coalition of activists who seek to disrupt immigration raids.

'She was a warrior. She died doing what was right,' a mother named Leesa who has a child at the same school as Good's son told The New York Post.

'[Renee Good] was trained against these ICE agents — what to do, what not to do, it's a very thorough training.

'I know she was doing the right thing. I watched the video plenty of times but I also know in my heart the woman she was, she was doing everything right.'

In surveillance footage, Good was seen apparently blocking the road with her SUV for four minutes before she was killed.

About 20 seconds after Good pulled up to the street, a passenger - believed to be her wife Rebecca - exited the vehicle and eventually began filming. 

There is speculation that Rebecca, who admitted to bringing her spouse to the anti-ICE protest, exited the car so she could begin filming any potential clash with federal agents.

She was seen wielding her camera during Ross's confrontation with her wife but it is unclear when she first started to record.

Other footage from the shooting shows an officer approaching Good's stopped SUV. He grabbed the handle as he allegedly demanded she open the door. 

Her Honda Pilot then began to pull forward and Ross pulled his weapon, immediately firing three shots and jumping back as the vehicle moved toward him.

It is not clear from the videos if the vehicle made contact with Ross. After the shooting, the SUV slammed into two cars parked on a curb before crashing to a stop.

Almost immediately after the shooting, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem described Good's actions as 'an act of domestic terrorism' as she defended Ross as an experienced law enforcement professional who followed his training.

She claimed he shot Good after he believed she was trying to run him or other agents over with her vehicle.

President Trump also called the Good a 'professional agitator' and claimed she was shot in 'self-defense.'

He then reiterated that message on Sunday, saying Good was 'very violent' and 'very radical,' calling her and her wife 'professional agitators' and suggesting that federal authorities would 'find out who's paying for it.'

Experts in domestic terrorism cases now say the Trump administration jumped the gun in claiming that Good was a 'domestic terrorist' and failed to follow traditional procedures for determining whether a case should be classified as domestic terrorism.

'There used to be a process, deliberate and considered, to figure out if behavior could be legitimately described as domestic terrorism,' Thomas E Brzozowski, former counsel for domestic terrorism in the Justice Department's national security division, told the Times.

'And when it's not followed, then the term becomes little more than a political cudgel to bash one's enemies.'

Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo last month that greatly expanded the federal government's definition of domestic terrorism, classifying it as not just recognizably violent crimes like rioting and looting, but also including things like impeding law enforcement officers or doxxing them.

The memo asserted that domestic terrorists use violence or the threat of violence to advance 'political and social agendas,' all of which are traditionally associated with progressive activism, according to The Times.

Among the causes the memo listed were opposition to immigration enforcement, anticapitalism and 'hostility towards traditional views on family, religion and morality.'

'When you have a memo like this, it complicates things because it builds in a set of assumptions about what domestic terrorism is and what is not,' Brzozowski said.

'If you're an investigator in the field, you can't simply run away from this new definition,' he added. 'You have to deal with it.' 

Meanwhile, officials in Minnesota are trying to take matters into their own hands by suing the Trump administration in an effort to block immigration enforcement operations.

The lawsuit asks a federal court in Minnesota to declare the surge of new ICE agent arrivals unconstitutional and unlawful, alleging that Operation Metro Surge violates federal law because it is arbitrary - noting that other states are not seeing equitable crackdowns.

State officials are also seeking a ban on US officers threatening to use physical force or brandishing weapons against people who are not subject to an immigration arrest, and other limits on federal law enforcement action.

They are further asking a judge to prevent the federal government from arresting US citizens and visa holders without probable cause that they have committed a crime.

While the Trump administration says the surge in immigration raids in Minnesota is about fighting fraud, the lawsuit says ICE agents have no expertise in combatting fraud in government programs.

It instead claims the federal government is targeting Minnesota over politics, which it says is a violation of the First Amendment.