In Minneapolis, the tragic death of 37-year-old Alex Pretti at the hands of a U.S. Border Patrol officer has stirred public concern and debate over law enforcement practices. The incident occurred on January 24, 2026, causing significant disruption within the community. In response to the unfolding situation, the reactions across the corporate sector have underscored a pattern of restraint and selective engagement.
Among Minnesota-based business leaders, a collective response emerged in the form of an open letter authored by the heads of more than 60 companies operating within the state. The letter, while not explicitly naming Alex Pretti or Renee Nicole Good—the latter also a victim in related federal enforcement actions—referred obliquely to the "recent challenges facing our state." It acknowledged the "widespread disruption and tragic loss of life" resulting from these difficulties and issued a call for "immediate deescalation of tensions." Such language reflects a cautious approach, balancing acknowledgment of the situation's gravity with a deliberate avoidance of taking pronounced stances on specific events or parties involved.
However, this measured tone contrasts notably with events unfolding outside Minnesota, where top-level executives from globally influential companies demonstrated their allegiance to the current administration in more explicit terms. On the evening following Pretti's shooting, a number of prominent CEOs attended a private, invitation-only screening of "Melania," a documentary about the First Lady produced by Amazon MGM Studios. The venue was the White House itself, reflecting the high-profile nature of the gathering.
Among those in attendance were figures such as Tim Cook of Apple, Andy Jassy of Amazon, Lisa Su of AMD, Eric Yuan of Zoom, and Lynn Martin of the New York Stock Exchange. Despite invitations, none of these leaders provided comment when approached regarding their participation or their views on the ongoing incidents involving federal enforcement agencies. The White House also declined to issue statements pertaining to the event or the incidents in Minneapolis.
First Lady Melania Trump posted a photograph from the screening on social media platform X, expressing that she felt "deeply humbled to have been surrounded by an inspiring room of friends, family, and cultural iconoclasts" ahead of the documentary’s global release scheduled for the following Friday. This endorsement by the First Lady and the participation of such influential business leaders underscore a public show of support for the administration despite growing public scrutiny and criticism.
Nevertheless, the alignment of these corporate titans with the president and his administration exists amid a broader context marked by increasing public disapproval. Since taking office a year prior, President Trump’s popularity has waned, yet many CEOs continue to either openly support him or take a cautious stance to avoid alienating the government, especially as it exhibits more aggressive and confrontational behavior both domestically and internationally.
The administration’s actions have included the deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel in Minnesota, considerations toward acquiring Greenland, public disparagement of NATO allies during the Davos gathering, initiation of a criminal investigation into the Federal Reserve chairman, and attempts to leverage American corporate resources to exploit Venezuela’s oil reserves. Such measures contribute to a complex political backdrop that corporate leaders must navigate carefully to maintain shareholder interests and operational stability.
Public opinion appears to diverge from the perspectives or silence of many within Corporate America. Polling indicates that a majority—51% of Americans—believe the ICE agent responsible for the killing of Renee Good acted inappropriately and that the incident exemplifies broader concerns with ICE’s operational practices. The use of deadly force against civilians underscores a particularly sensitive issue for the general populace, which has resulted in heightened attention and frustration.
These developments raise questions about the role and responsibilities of leadership within the business community during times of social and political tension. As author and former investment banker William D. Cohan reflected on the Pivot podcast earlier in the month, there is a disconnect between the resources and influence possessed by business leaders and their reluctance to speak out forcefully. Cohan remarked, "Why have ‘F-you’ money if you’re not going to speak up and use it?" He acknowledged the micro-level concerns business leaders may have, such as protecting customers and employees, but emphasized the importance of leveraging collective influence to challenge powerful governmental actors.
The notion that a unified corporate stance could isolate political figures and effect change was presented as an existential challenge by Cohan. This perspective invites reconsideration of leadership ethics and the strategic calculus behind public engagement or conspicuous disengagement. Notably, Tim Cook’s own social media biography features a quotation attributed to Martin Luther King Jr.: "Life’s most persistent and urgent question is: ‘What are you doing for others?’" Yet, as noted by observers, this quote appears to lack verified attribution to King himself, adding a layer of complexity to its usage in this context.
In sum, the juxtaposition of subdued acknowledgment from Minnesota’s business leaders with the more overt alignment of high-profile executives with the administration illustrates the multifaceted nature of corporate response in the face of political and social crises. Decisions appear governed by a mixture of shareholder obligations, risk aversion, and strategic positioning, all played out against the backdrop of an administration embroiled in controversial actions and diminishing public support.