\n<\/p>\n
Congressional hearings are often dismissed as political theater. Lawmakers ask pointed questions, witnesses give prepared and careful answers and the exchange becomes part of the daily churn of partisan debate. But occasionally those exchanges reveal something deeper about how a government understands its own authority.<\/p>\n Noem declined to say what the moment seemed to demand: that the U.S. government should not pronounce that kind of judgment before the facts are known.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n Pressed by lawmakers about her claim that two Americans killed by federal agents in Minneapolis \u2014 Alex Pretti<\/a>, an intensive care nurse, and Renee Good<\/a>, a wife and mother of three \u2014 were \u201cdomestic terrorists,\u201d Noem repeatedly refused to withdraw the label<\/a>. She expressed sympathy for the families. She noted that the investigation is ongoing. At one point she insisted, \u201cI did not call him a domestic terrorist. I said it appeared to be an incident of<\/a>\u201d domestic terrorism. But she declined to say what the moment seemed to demand: that the government should not pronounce that kind of judgment before the facts are known.<\/p>\n That refusal matters. \u201cDomestic terrorist\u201d is one of the most serious accusations the modern American government can make. It signals that a person is not merely suspected of wrongdoing but belongs in the category of enemies of the state.<\/p>\n