Allegations of Excessive Force at Portland ICE Facility
Portland’s political and legal communities are at odds over whether federal agents should be prosecuted under state law for their actions during recent protests outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in south Portland.
Witnesses described troubling scenes: a 19-year-old woman pepper-sprayed in the face, an elderly couple shoved to the ground, and tear gas fired into a crowd without warning. Portland city officials and the Police Bureau claim these tactics violated state limits on police force and protest management — limits that Portland officers themselves are legally bound to follow under a 2014 civil rights settlement and post-2020 state reforms.
However, local law enforcement leaders say an old constitutional interpretation still gives federal agents broad immunity from state-level prosecution, leaving them unable to act despite mounting political pressure.
Also Read
Growing Political Pressure
Top Oregon Democrats, including U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, have called for accountability. Wyden stated that federal officers “must be held legally accountable if they break the law in pursuit of extralegal orders.”
His spokesperson confirmed that Wyden supports potential arrests of federal agents who violate Oregon laws. Oregon’s two U.S. senators and its Portland-area congresswomen have expressed similar views, arguing that state and local law enforcement have the authority — and obligation — to enforce civil rights protections for Oregonians.
The push follows national calls from Democratic leaders like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who criticized what she called “broad sweeps that terrorize law-abiding residents.” Colorado officials recently opened a state-level investigation into a federal agent’s use of a chokehold at an ICE facility, a move that has inspired Oregon lawmakers to consider similar action.
Local Legal Conflict
Portland Police Commander Franz Schoening testified last week that federal agents violated Oregon law by deploying tear gas without warning or clear threat. Oregon’s laws require officers to issue alerts and use chemical agents only when facing an objectively reasonable danger.
Separately, attorneys for a Gresham woman claim ICE agents detained her unlawfully after she photographed their vehicles, and they’ve requested investigations from both the Oregon Department of Justice and the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office.
The Oregon DOJ has already filed evidence alleging excessive force by federal officers, including video footage of a man tackled from behind and falling face-first onto the pavement.
Meanwhile, Trump administration officials have accused Portland police of discriminating against conservatives and failing to cooperate with federal law enforcement.
Attorney General Rayfield’s Position
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield has shown interest in pursuing accountability. His office is currently arguing before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a separate case involving a federal Drug Enforcement Administration agent accused of killing a cyclist while driving recklessly during surveillance.
“We’re committed to using every tool available to hold the federal government accountable when it oversteps or puts Oregonians’ rights at risk,” Rayfield said. “Sometimes that means using the law in innovative ways to keep people safe.”
Constitutional Barriers
Despite these calls for prosecution, Multnomah County District Attorney Nathan Vasquez cited the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes federal law as superior to conflicting state laws. This clause was the main reason a federal judge dismissed the DEA case earlier this year.
Vasquez said he wants to protect the community but lacks legal authority to prosecute federal officers for how they perform their duties. “It’s simply not a tool available to me,” he said.
Governor Tina Kotek’s office confirmed that discussions are underway about potential legislation to address the issue in 2026. Kotek has previously reminded Homeland Security officials that Oregon’s policing standards must apply to federal operations within the state.
“The governor has not shied away from protecting Oregon communities and our democracy from the Trump administration’s abuses of power,” said spokesperson Roxy Mayer.
Can States Prosecute Federal Agents?
According to Lewis & Clark Law School professor Tung Yin, there are limited circumstances in which state or local prosecutors could charge federal agents, though those cases would likely be moved to federal court — where the government often seeks dismissal.
A longstanding Supreme Court precedent from 1890 gives broad immunity to federal officers who act under federal authority. In that case, a U.S. marshal who killed a man while protecting a Supreme Court justice was shielded from murder charges in California.
Later rulings have refined the standard: courts typically consider whether the agent’s actions were “necessary and proper.” For example, in 2001, the Ninth Circuit allowed Idaho prosecutors to pursue a manslaughter case against an FBI sniper involved in the Ruby Ridge standoff — but the charges were eventually dropped.
Yin suggested that even if prosecutions remain difficult, local police involvement could still help document potential civil rights violations and preserve evidence for civil suits. “If an agent claims they feared for their life, that’s something they’d have to argue in court,” he explained. “It’s not an instant shield against prosecution.”
Federal and Police Reactions
The Department of Homeland Security and ICE have declined to comment, while the U.S. Justice Department maintains that arresting federal agents performing official duties would be “illegal and futile.”
Nevertheless, support for Oregon Democrats’ proposal is spreading. San Francisco’s district attorney and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker have voiced similar positions.
“Oregon must use every tool available to protect our communities from Trump,” said U.S. Rep. Maxine Dexter of Portland, calling federal crackdowns part of “a cruel immigration machine.”
Sen. Jeff Merkley’s office emphasized that state and local law enforcement “have legal tools to protect Oregonians’ civil rights and hold violators accountable.” Rep. Suzanne Bonamici added that she supports state enforcement “if a federal agent acts outside the scope of their official duties.”
However, the Portland Police Bureau remains cautious. Spokesperson Mike Benner referred to bureau rules that require compliance with all applicable state and federal laws, while Sgt. Kevin Allen warned that “local law enforcement cannot interfere” with federal jurisdiction.
“Some don’t understand that the federal government has nationwide authority,” Allen said, signaling that — at least for now — Portland police will not act on lawmakers’ calls for arrests.
The Path Forward
The clash between Oregon Democrats and federal authority underscores a long-standing constitutional tension: how far states can go to check federal power within their borders.
While advocates push for accountability and reform, legal experts caution that any attempt to charge federal agents will face steep constitutional and procedural hurdles. Still, Oregon’s top officials appear determined to test those limits — and perhaps redefine them.
As Professor Yin put it, “The law leaves little room, but not no room. If Oregon wants to challenge that boundary, this might be the moment to do it.”
