Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
A commander of the Portland police testified on Wednesday that federal agents deployed under orders from President Trump heightened tensions during the protests outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building.
During a federal bench trial, Portland Police Bureau Commander Franz Schoening asserted that rather than diffusing the situation, the presence of federal troops intensified violence. This testimony came as part of a legal examination of Trump’s decision to send the National Guard to Portland, an action that city leaders have characterized as unnecessary and inflammatory.
Escalation of Violent Incidents
Schoening recounted several incidents where federal personnel discharged tear gas on what he labeled nonviolent demonstrators, leading him to describe the actions as “startling.” Since June, the ICE facility has served as a focal point for protests.
Commander Schoening emphasized that both state and federal laws prohibit police from utilizing certain tactics, which have reportedly been employed by federal officers, including the use of tear gas and other munitions. He noted that even Portland police officers were affected by tear gas, resulting in their retreat from the area.
Allegations of Unprovoked Force
One significant protest on October 18 saw a federal agent allegedly launch a munition, whether smoke or tear gas, which ricocheted off the ICE facility’s driveway and landed on its roof. This prompted additional shots from federal agents into the crowd below.
Schoening remarked, “We didn’t see any violent conduct or behavior that would have justified that use of force. It appeared to be triggered by the federal officer’s deployment of that munition. Our officers were in close proximity and were struck by federal munitions.”
Legal Arguments Presented
Portland attorney Caroline Turco asserted that evidence would affirm the view that the protests remained largely peaceful and thus did not warrant the intervention of the National Guard. In her opening statements, Turco framed the case as a critical examination of whether the nation is guided by constitutional law or has succumbed to martial law.
The U.S. Justice Department, however, contended that federal forces faced targeted aggression throughout the summer months. DOJ attorney Eric Hamilton claimed, “Agitators have used violence and threatened violence against officers and property.”
The Trump Administration’s Position
In court documents, the Trump administration accused Portland officials of being “unhelpful and at times hostile,” asserting that local police failed to provide necessary support to federal agents. DOJ attorneys pointed out, “The record is replete with evidence of the PPB failing to provide assistance when federal officials requested it.”
Further, the administration claimed that the protests necessitated the reassignment of Department of Homeland Security agents from across the nation to Portland due to the escalating situation.
Justifications for Federal Action
The Trump administration also argued that it had the authority to call upon the National Guard, based on an inability to enforce the law through regular forces in Portland. Officials characterized the protests as a “rebellion” or presenting the “danger of rebellion,” both cited under federal law as justifications for deploying the National Guard.
Trial Expectations and Future Developments
The non-jury trial is projected to last three days, during which federal officials are expected to provide testimony. Local law enforcement maintains that they arrest individuals as necessary while also honoring First Amendment rights.
This ongoing legal battle not only touches on law enforcement practices but also raises important questions regarding civil liberties and government intervention during protests.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
