Former CBP Commissioner Cites ‘Pervasive’ Excessive Force Allegations at Portland ICE Protests Amid Ongoing Federal Lawsuit

Former federal law enforcement leader files detailed critique as court challenge targets crowd-control tactics

A former commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection has submitted a written statement in federal court describing what he characterizes as a pervasive pattern of unnecessary and excessive force by federal officers policing demonstrations outside Portland’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility near the city’s south waterfront.

The statement was filed in support of a class-action lawsuit seeking court-ordered limits on federal agents’ use of crowd-control weapons and tactics at and around the ICE building. The complaint asks a judge to restrict or prohibit certain deployments of tear gas, pepper balls, and other so-called “less-lethal” munitions, arguing that current practices unlawfully burden protected speech and assembly and pose a risk of serious injury.

Claims focus on warnings, targeting, and compliance with use-of-force standards

The former CBP commissioner, Gil Kerlikowske—who previously led CBP from 2014 to 2017 and served as Seattle’s police chief—said his conclusions were based on review of video, testimony, and other materials submitted in the case. In his declaration, he asserted that federal officers have repeatedly used force without adequate warnings, used force when not necessary to address a threat, and misused impact munitions by firing pepper balls directly at people.

The lawsuit includes accounts from Portland residents Richard and Laurie Eckman, who said they were injured after attending an October protest. Richard Eckman described breathing difficulties and disorientation after federal agents deployed gas or smoke during the event.

City and state officials separately raise concerns about escalation near the ICE facility

Portland’s city attorney has also documented incidents in official correspondence describing what the city called indiscriminate uses of impact munitions and pepper spray against otherwise peaceful demonstrators. State officials, including Oregon’s attorney general and local prosecutors, have publicly warned that reported excessive-force incidents involving federal officers would be scrutinized, while also acknowledging legal complexities that can arise when state authorities assess conduct by federal personnel.

The legal dispute unfolds amid broader tensions over the federal government’s posture in Portland. In October 2025, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking an attempted federalization and deployment of National Guard troops to Portland tied to protest activity near the ICE facility; later court actions extended and built on that injunction in the same case.

Federal position and next procedural step

Federal immigration authorities have maintained in public statements that their officers are trained and operate within law and policy, while also emphasizing threats and assaults faced by personnel during enforcement and protest operations. As of the most recent filings described in the case record, the federal government had not yet filed a substantive court response addressing the specific allegations raised in the Kerlikowske declaration and related witness accounts.

The case is scheduled for a status conference on Friday, January 30.

• The lawsuit seeks narrowly defined limits on specific crowd-control tools and tactics near the ICE building.
• Declarations submitted by plaintiffs allege repeated injuries and inadequate warnings before force was used.
• Parallel city and state communications frame the dispute as both a civil-rights and public-safety issue.