This event involves a jurisdictional dispute between Minnesota state officials and federal ICE authorities over investigation procedures following a fatal shooting. Constitutional damage is limited: separation of powers shows moderate tension (3.5) as state/federal authorities clash over investigative jurisdiction, rule of law (2.5) reflects procedural disagreement but not systemic breakdown, violence (2) acknowledges the fatal shooting but as isolated incident, civil rights (1.5) minimal as focused on procedure not rights violation. Enforcement_action mechanism adds 15% modifier, single_state scope reduces by 15%. Severity multipliers near 1.0 as this is procedural dispute unlikely to create lasting precedent. Final A-score 10.59 well below threshold. B-score elevated (23.10) due to media-friendly federal-state clash narrative, outrage potential around ICE shooting, and strategic value in immigration enforcement debates. However, this is fundamentally a routine jurisdictional dispute over investigation procedures following an officer-involved shooting - common in federal-state law enforcement interactions. Lacks systemic constitutional mechanism and represents normal friction in federalism rather than constitutional crisis.