U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon accuses federal officers of ‘escalating pattern’ of violence
Two ICE-related shootings spark protests across the US
Protests continued in cities across the country after two ICE-related shootings in separate parts of the country.
An Oregon judge on February 3 placed sweeping limits on the types of actions federal agents sent to Portland can take against demonstrators exercising their rights to free speech and nonviolent protest.
Homeland security officials engaged in “an escalating pattern of unnecessary, excessive and indiscriminate violence against protesters,” U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon wrote. The judge issued restrictions, including a ban on the agents’ use of chemical irritants.
The judge made the comments after a request for a restraining order was filed in connection with a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Oregon on behalf of local protesters.
“In a well-functioning constitutional democratic republic, free speech, courageous reporting, and nonviolent protest are all allowed, respected, and even celebrated. In a dictatorship, this is not the case,” Simon wrote in his ruling.
He added, “Our nation is at a crossroads. We have been here before, and we have been back on the right path before, albeit with occasional detours. An impartial and independent judiciary operating under the rule of law has a responsibility we must not shirk in helping our nation find its constitutional compass. Therefore, as discussed in more detail below, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.”
The temporary restraining order applies to the officers’ conduct outside the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service building in Portland. The site south of the city’s downtown has been a hotbed of protests for months, particularly after Homeland Security agents shot and killed two Americans in Minnesota and two Venezuelan immigrants in Portland.
According to the order, off-site personnel cannot use riot control weapons unless facing an immediate threat, cannot make arrests unless they are suspected of committing a crime, and are prohibited from using firearms unless “the use of deadly force is legally justified.” The order also notes that protesters ignoring orders to disperse or entering federal property are not adequate justifications for agents to deploy riot-control weapons.
In a statement responding to the ruling, Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security, described the people the order protects as “insurgents and terrorists.”
“The First Amendment protects speech and peaceful assembly, not rioting,” McLaughlin said. “Insurgents and terrorists have attacked law enforcement, set off fireworks, slashed car tires, and destroyed federal property. Others have ignored orders, attempted to impede law enforcement operations, and used their vehicles as weapons against officers…Despite these serious threats and dangerous conditions, our law enforcement agencies followed their training and used the minimum amount of force necessary to protect themselves, the public, and federal property.”
USA TODAY has reached out to the ACLU of Oregon for comment on the judge’s order.
