Fed's Rule Of Law: Portland's Exception?

The rule of law is a foundational principle of a free and just society. However, recent events in Portland, Oregon, have brought this into question. Federal law enforcement officers have been accused of employing excessive force and unlawful tactics when dealing with protesters. This includes the use of batons, tear gas, and pulling people into unmarked vans. While some of these actions may be legal, they have raised concerns about the federal government's commitment to the rule of law and the protection of citizens' rights. As a result, there have been calls for accountability and for the rule of law to be upheld for all, including federal agents.

Federal agents in Portland have deployed tear gas without warning

The rule of law is a foundation of a free and just society. However, the recent events in Portland, Oregon, have brought to light the fragile nature of this concept in America. Federal law enforcement officers have been accused of using excessive force and acting more like an occupying army than agents of a democratic nation.

One of the most concerning tactics employed by federal agents in Portland is the deployment of tear gas without warning. While Oregon law prohibits the use of tear gas except in riots and requires law enforcement agencies to give two warnings before its deployment, these rules do not apply to federal agencies. On multiple occasions, federal agents have been reported to have used tear gas indiscriminately against protesters, with little regard for the potential health and environmental risks associated with its use.

For example, on July 19, 2020, federal agents in Portland detonated an impact blast without warning and began spreading clouds of tear gas. Many protesters walked away, but those who remained in range fell to the street, gasping and choking. This incident is just one among many where federal agents have used tear gas and other crowd control munitions against protesters in Portland, making it the most tear-gassed city in America.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oregon has actively opposed the use of tear gas by federal agents in Portland. They have sued the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Marshals Service, seeking to add them to an existing order that bans local law enforcement from using force against journalists and legal observers at protests. Despite these efforts and pleas from local officials, federal agents have continued their crackdown, undeterred by civil rights lawsuits.

The conduct of federal agents in Portland has raised serious concerns about the rule of law and the excessive use of force. While the president has directed these officers to protect federal property, it does not give them free rein to act unlawfully. The U.S. attorney for Oregon and the Multnomah County district attorney are expected to address these issues and ensure that all lawless behavior is addressed under the rule of law.

Federal agents have used excessive force on protesters

In 2020, federal agents were deployed in Portland, Oregon, amid anti-police protests. These federal agents were accused of using excessive force on protesters.

In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed that its agents had used unmarked vehicles to detain protesters. DHS official Ken Cuccinelli defended the tactic, stating that it was used to move detainees to a "safe location for questioning". However, the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon (ACLU) called for an investigation, with its interim executive director, Jann Carson, stating, "What is happening now in Portland should concern everyone in the United States. Usually when we see people in unmarked cars forcibly grab someone off the street, we call it kidnapping."

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed a lawsuit against DHS and other federal agencies, seeking to stop them from unlawfully detaining Oregon residents. She stated, "The federal administration has chosen Portland to use their scare tactics to stop our residents from protesting police brutality and from supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. Every American should be repulsed when they see this happening. If this can happen here in Portland, it can happen anywhere."

In addition to the use of unmarked vehicles, federal agents were also accused of using excessive force on protesters, including the use of batons, tear gas, and less-than-lethal munitions. In one incident, Navy veteran Chris Davis was struck at least five times with a baton by federal agents outside the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse. In another incident, Donavan La Bella suffered facial and skull fractures when he was shot in the head by a federal law enforcement officer with an impact munition.

Amnesty International USA also documented incidents of police violence and excessive force against Black Lives Matter protesters, medics, journalists, and legal observers. Justin Mazzola, a researcher at Amnesty International USA, stated, "The unnecessary and sometimes excessive use of force by police against protesters exhibits the very systemic racism and impunity they had taken to the streets to protest. [...] President Trump's actions represent a slippery slope toward authoritarianism and must immediately stop."

Federal agents have attacked reporters

In July 2020, federal agents in Portland, Oregon, were filmed using aggressive tactics against protesters, including members of the press. In one incident, Navy veteran Chris Davis was struck at least five times with a baton by federal agents outside the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse. On another occasion, federal agents injured multiple reporters, including Donovan Farley and Alex Milan Tracy, with less-than-lethal munitions. These actions have been criticised as a violation of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of the press.

The use of force by federal agents against reporters and other protesters in Portland has been widely condemned. An internal investigation was launched by the U.S. Marshal's Service, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon filed a lawsuit against the federal agents. A federal judge in Oregon, Michael H. Simon, also filed an injunction prohibiting Portland police from using force on journalists, although this injunction does not currently apply to federal agents.

The actions of the federal agents in Portland have been described as reminiscent of an occupying army, with tactics that are not in line with democratic principles. There have been calls for the U.S. Attorney for Oregon and the Multnomah County district attorney to convene state and federal grand juries to explore the possibility of criminal charges. While the rule of law is meant to apply to everyone equally, the recent events in Portland have highlighted the fragility of this principle and the need for all officials to be held accountable for their actions.

To address the issue of attacks on reporters by federal agents, the Journalist Protection Act has been reintroduced. This legislation aims to classify intimidation or attacks against reporters as federal crimes, providing additional protection for journalists who face threats or bodily harm while carrying out their work.

Federal agents have pulled people into unmarked vans

In July 2020, federal officers in Portland, Oregon, were filmed pulling people into unmarked vans. The incidents, dubbed the "Portland kidnappings", caused outrage and drew comparisons to authoritarian regimes. While some defended the practice as a legitimate tactic to move detainees to a "safe location for questioning", others argued that it was unlawful and reminiscent of an occupying army.

The use of unmarked vans by federal agents in Portland has been widely reported and condemned. In one instance, a protester named Mark Pettibone was pulled into an unmarked van on July 15, 2020, and taken to the federal courthouse. Pettibone described how he was "tossed into the van" and had his "beanie pulled over [his] face so [he] couldn't see". Another individual, Conner O'Shea, recounted a similar experience, stating that he ran and hid when he saw people in camouflage jump out of an unmarked van. Videos and personal accounts indicate that federal officers have been driving around downtown Portland in unmarked vehicles, detaining individuals without explanation, and pursuing those who attempt to flee.

The legality of these actions has been called into question. While federal officials have defended the tactic as necessary for questioning individuals suspected of crimes, others argue that it violates the rule of law. The rule of law dictates that no one is above the law, including federal agents. The use of force by police and the killing of George Floyd have brought attention to the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that unlawful actions against protesters are not excused or justified.

The detentions and use of force by federal agents in Portland have been met with swift condemnations from Oregon's congressional delegation, state and local officials, and civil liberties organizations. An internal investigation was announced by the U.S. Marshal's Service, and lawsuits have been filed against federal agents by the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon. Despite these efforts, the actions of federal agents in Portland highlight the fragile nature of the rule of law and the ongoing challenges in holding law enforcement accountable for their actions.

Federal agents have denied detainees access to lawyers

Federal agents have been accused of denying detainees access to lawyers. In Portland, Oregon, federal agents have been accused of using aggressive tactics, including deploying tear gas without warning and pulling people into unmarked vans. In one incident, a protester named Mark Pettibone was taken to the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and refused to answer questions without a lawyer present. The officers eventually let him go. In another incident, a protester named Juniper Simonis was detained for several hours and asked for an attorney multiple times but was not provided one.

While federal law enforcement agencies are not subject to state regulations, they are still bound by the Constitution and federal laws. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel, and the Due Process Clause ensures fundamental fairness for all defendants in civil proceedings. Additionally, the First Amendment protects the freedom of the press, prohibiting the use of force against reporters covering protests.

However, federal agents in Portland have been accused of violating these rights. In one instance, federal agents injured multiple reporters, including Donovan Farley and Alex Milan Tracy, with less-than-lethal munitions. A federal judge in Oregon, Michael H. Simon, filed an injunction prohibiting Portland police from using force on journalists, but it did not apply to federal agents.

The issues with access to legal counsel for detainees are not limited to Portland. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities have been criticized for their inadequate provisions for attorney visits, with some maintaining only a single visitation room for over a thousand detainees. The remote locations of many detention facilities further constrain detainees' access to lawyers. Additionally, arbitrary changing of visitation rules, insufficient staffing, and interruptions or listening in on meetings by private contractors create barriers to attorney-client visits.

While ICE has stated that it respects the rights of aliens in removal proceedings to consult with a lawyer, the practical obstacles faced by detainees and their lawyers highlight the challenges in ensuring access to legal representation. These issues have led to lawsuits filed by organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, alleging violations of due process rights and free speech rights.

Frequently asked questions