The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has accused the City of Portland of violating a long-standing police reform agreement by refusing to fully share records related to recent protests and law enforcement actions.
In a strongly worded letter sent Wednesday, DOJ Civil Rights Division Chief Harmeet Dhillon said Portland is “failing to comply” with the 2014 settlement agreement that governs how the Portland Police Bureau (PPB) handles use of force, especially in cases involving people with mental illness. The federal government claims the city is withholding key records necessary to monitor compliance, including data connected to a new investigation into alleged political bias within the police department.
The dispute stems from the DOJ’s demand for complete “access to all records” under the terms of the decade-old settlement. That settlement, negotiated under President Barack Obama’s administration, followed years of complaints that Portland police used excessive force during encounters with people in mental health crises.
Also Read
Now, the DOJ says the same agreement gives it authority to require the city to turn over protest-related records as part of a broader probe into whether the PPB engages in “viewpoint discrimination” — favoring left-wing demonstrators while treating right-wing activists and journalists more harshly.
The issue gained national attention after Portland police arrested conservative journalist Nick Sortor during a chaotic confrontation outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in South Portland earlier this month. Sortor, who was covering the protest, was detained overnight and released without charges after the Multnomah County District Attorney concluded he acted in self-defense.
Following the incident, Dhillon’s office launched a formal inquiry on Oct. 3, alleging the PPB showed political bias and violated constitutional rights. City attorneys initially complied with some document requests but have not yet delivered the full set of materials, prompting the latest demand from the DOJ.
According to Dhillon, the city’s partial cooperation and lack of a clear timeline violate the settlement’s requirement that the DOJ have full and direct access to PPB’s records. A confidential mediation session on Oct. 8 failed to resolve the issue, leading the DOJ to escalate its response.
The DOJ’s new request is extensive. It demands all communications between Portland’s mayor, police chief, and other city officials concerning protests, ICE, or immigration; every piece of body-worn camera footage captured at protests; and even emails related to zoning enforcement near the ICE building. The DOJ set a compliance deadline of Nov. 28.
Dhillon has publicly criticized what she calls Portland’s “woke police practices,” writing on social media that the city “ignores the rights of citizens & journalists.” She argues that the federal government must intervene to ensure the police department enforces policies fairly, regardless of political viewpoint.
City leaders, however, see the DOJ’s actions as politically motivated. Portland City Attorney Robert Taylor pushed back sharply in a statement Thursday, accusing the Trump administration of using the settlement agreement as a tool for political retaliation.
“The City Attorney’s Office believes this is unlawful and inappropriate — another clear example of federal overreach,” Taylor said. “This demonstrates the political weaponization of the Settlement Agreement by the U.S. Department of Justice to satisfy President Donald Trump’s fixation on our city.”
So far, neither side has filed motions in federal court regarding the DOJ’s investigation. U.S. District Judge Michael Simon, who has overseen the case since the original lawsuit in 2012, is scheduled to hold the next status hearing on Jan. 6. Judge Simon regularly meets with both parties and an independent monitor twice a year to review the city’s compliance with the agreement.
An attorney for Nick Sortor has said the journalist plans to sue the city for wrongful arrest, though no lawsuit has yet been filed. Meanwhile, Portland officials continue to argue that the DOJ’s recent document demands extend far beyond the original scope of the settlement, which focused solely on police interactions with people experiencing mental health crises.
The DOJ has made no public statement since sending the letter, and its press communications have been limited due to the ongoing federal government shutdown.
As tensions escalate, Portland finds itself once again at the center of a national debate over policing, politics, and federal authority. The outcome of this latest conflict could determine not only the future of Portland’s police reforms but also how far Washington can go in enforcing them.
