In Portland, Residents Seek a Judge’s Order to Stop ICE Flooding Apartments with Tear Gas

The operations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Portland, Ore., have often been among the most visible of the second Trump administration, at least before the DHS agencies turned Minneapolis into a battleground this winter. Prior to that point, however, the most enduring images of protests against ICE operations had often been rooted in Portland, where everything from swarms of protestors in inflatable mascot suits or squads of nude bicyclists were employed to demonstrate how disproportionately cruel the stock standard government response of unprovoked violence tends to be. In the wake of the killing of multiple American citizens by ICE and Border Patrol, protests outside of the ICE office in Portland’s South Waterfront neighborhood have continued on a regular basis, frequently turning violent when masked agents deploy chemical munitions including fired pepper balls and tear gas against peaceful crowds. Now, multiple groups affected by these chemical munitions are in the process of taking ICE to court, with cases in front of two judges.

One large case, brought by protestors and independent journalists, is in front of U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon, and sees protestors arguing that ICE agents have continued to deploy tear gas against peaceful protestors even in the absence of any threat, in violation of Judge Simon’s own earlier restraining order. They’re arguing that their First Amendment rights to free speech and protest have been violated by agents attempting to purge the area of those resisting Trump’s immigration apparatus, under the rationale that federal agents need those crowd control chemicals thanks to the fact that the building is “frequently besieged by violent agitators and obstructive crowd.” This is not supported by the lack of actual charges against protestors in Portland, as only a handful have been charged with more serious crimes such as assault, with most of the modest number of charges being lesser offenses like “failure to comply.”

Last week, we submitted a court filing with eyewitness testimony detailing an abuse of power by federal agents at the Portland ICE facility targeting children and peaceful crowds. And next week, we’ll be in court.

We’ll continue to fight for Oregonians every day. #orpol

[image or embed]

— Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield (@agdanrayfield.bsky.social) Feb 25, 2026 at 11:05 PM

The government’s flimsy argument attempts to claim that because the First Amendment doesn’t specifically prohibit officers from using tear gas “to disperse a crowd that has become violent or disruptive,” it is fair game. The ACLU of Oregon, representing the protestors, naturally disagrees, and seeks a more severe injunction to restrict ICE’s deployment of chemical munitions.

“You can’t use force on people who have not done anything to justify that use of force,” said civil rights attorney Ashlee Albies, working alongside the ACLU, to Oregon Public Broadcasting. “If there are one or two people in a crowd that is engaging in conduct that is unlawful, the appropriate response is to arrest those people. It is not to teargas thousands of people. That’s not the appropriate response. That’s not the legal response.”

It’s not just the active protestors, though, who are taking ICE to court in Portland–it’s also the neighborhood, which includes among other things, an apartment complex and an elementary school within a block. The residents and property management company at said apartment, Gray’s Landing, have a case currently waiting for a written ruling from U.S. District Judge Amy Baggio, claiming that the wanton deployment of clouds of tear gas and chemical munitions have made their homes painful to live in, infringing on their Fourth Amendment rights in the process. They specifically want a ruling to limit the ability of ICE agents to deploy tear gas and other chemical munitions next to their homes.

We’re suing to stop DHS’s unlawful use of tear gas and other toxic chemicals near an affordable housing community in Portland, OR.

Here’s what residents have to say.

[image or embed]

— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) Feb 18, 2026 at 2:11 PM

Residents of Gray’s Landing describe an unsurprisingly punishing ordeal of an experience they’ve endured in the last year, given their constant proximity to the Portland ICE office. They say, among other things, that they’ve slept at times in gas masks and used wet towels to seal gaps in doors and windows in an attempt to keep the stinging tear gas out of their homes. One woman claimed the dubious-sounding medical advice that “her cortisol levels have been so high from the munitions that a doctor has recommended she have surgery to remove an adrenal gland,” which is a hell of a thing to read. Some tenants also said they’ve been shot with pepper balls by federal agents as they’re merely coming and going from their home.

“Defendants used massive amounts of tear gas, sometimes multiple times per day, on five different days in an eight-day period,” said attorney Dan Jacobson.

The residents are arguing that their Fourth Amendments rights have been violated because the chemicals employed by federal agents are an extension of the government intruding into their homes. The Justice Department predictably has countered saying that it can do whatever the fuck it wants, even though they acknowledge that the tear gas is indiscriminate in who it affects. An attorney for the DOJ wrote that “The Constitution does not compel law enforcement officers to rely solely on face-to-face physical confrontation with unlawful crowds simply because airborne irritants might drift to nearby buildings.” Or in other words, as long as the government claims that an “unlawful crowd” exists, they can flood your home with tear gas at will.

The federal judge in the case, however, seemed distinctly unconvinced of the government’s argument when grilling attorneys on both sides during closing arguments in the case last week. Pointing to video that clearly showed clouds of tear gas wafting a block away from the ICE office, toward the homes of the Gray’s Landing residents, U.S. District Judge Amy Baggio said “Help me understand why that’s not excessive.” Her ruling should arrive at any time.

The attorney for the residents, meanwhile, has drawn parallels to cases such as public exposure to lead-contaminated drinking water in Flint, Michigan, where courts found that the government had violated the right to bodily integrity by “introducing life-threatening substances into individuals without their consent.”

“Here the government is actively pumping toxic chemicals into the air right outside plaintiff’s windows,” said attorney Stephen Wirth.

Do you have a right, as an American citizen who is not even engaged in protest or confrontation with law enforcement officers or federal agents, to simply exist in your own home without being exposed to chemical munitions? The Trump administration says that’s apparently too much for citizens to ask for. Judges in Oregon will decide if they’re right.