PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A judge in Oregon on Tuesday temporarily restricted federal officers from using tear gas at protests at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland, just days after agents launched gas at a crowd of demonstrators including young children that local officials described as peaceful.
U.S. District Judge Michael Simon ordered federal officers not to use chemical or projectile munitions on people who pose no imminent threat of physical harm, or who are merely trespassing or refusing to disperse. Simon also limited federal officers from firing munitions at the head, neck or torso “unless the officer is legally justified in using deadly force against that person.”
Simon, whose temporary restraining order is in effect for 14 days, wrote that the nation "is now at a crossroads.”
“In a well-functioning constitutional democratic republic, free speech, courageous newsgathering, and nonviolent protest are all permitted, respected, and even celebrated,” he wrote. “In helping our nation find its constitutional compass, an impartial and independent judiciary operating under the rule of law has a responsibility that it may not shirk.”
The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Oregon on behalf of protesters and freelance journalists covering demonstrations at the flashpoint U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building.
The suit names as defendants the Department of Homeland Security and its head Kristi Noem, as well as President Donald Trump. It argues that federal officers’ use of chemical munitions and excessive force is a retaliation against protesters that chills their First Amendment rights.
The Department of Homeland Security said federal officers have “followed their training and used the minimum amount of force necessary to protect themselves, the public, and federal property.”
“DHS is taking appropriate and constitutional measures to uphold the rule of law and protect our officers and the public from dangerous rioters," spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said.
Cities across the country have seen demonstrations against the administration's immigration enforcement surge.
Last month, a federal appeals court suspended a decision that prohibited federal officers from using tear gas or pepper spray against peaceful protesters in Minnesota who aren’t obstructing law enforcement. An appeals court also halted a ruling from a federal judge in Chicago that restricted federal agents from using certain riot control weapons, such as tear gas and pepper balls, unless necessary to prevent an immediate threat. A similar lawsuit brought by the state is now before the same judge.
The Oregon complaint describes instances in which the plaintiffs — including a protester known for wearing a chicken costume, a married couple in their 80s and two freelance journalists — had chemical or “less-lethal” munitions used against them.
In October, 83-year-old Vietnam War veteran Richard Eckman and his 84-year-old wife Laurie Eckman joined a peaceful march to the ICE building. Federal officers then launched chemical munitions at the crowd, hitting Laurie Eckman in the head with a pepper ball and causing her to bleed, according to the complaint. With bloody clothes and hair, she sought treatment at a hospital, which gave her instructions for caring for a concussion. A munition also hit her husband’s walker, the complaint says.
Jack Dickinson, who frequently attends protests at the ICE building in a chicken suit, has had munitions aimed at him while posing no threat, according to the complaint. Federal officers have shot munitions at his face respirator and at his back, and launched a tear-gas canister that sparked next to his leg and burned a hole in his costume, the complaint says.
Freelance journalists Hugo Rios and Mason Lake have similarly been hit with pepper balls and tear gassed while marked as press, the complaint says.
“Defendants must be enjoined from gassing, shooting, hitting and arresting peaceful Portlanders and journalists willing to document federal abuses as if they are enemy combatants,” the complaint states.
The owner and residents of the affordable housing complex across the street from the ICE building have filed a separate lawsuit, similarly seeking to restrict federal officers’ use of tear gas because its residents have been repeatedly exposed over the past year.
Local officials have also spoken out against use of chemical munitions. Portland Mayor Keith Wilson demanded ICE leave the city after federal officers used such munitions Saturday at what he described as a “peaceful daytime protest where the vast majority of those present violated no laws, made no threat, and posed no danger to federal forces.”
“To those who continue to work for ICE: Resign. To those who control this facility: Leave,” Wilson wrote in a statement Saturday night.
The protest was one of many similar demonstrations nationwide against the immigration crackdown in cities like Minneapolis, where in recent weeks federal agents killed two people, Alex Pretti and Renee Good.
Associated Press writers Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis and Sophia Tareen in Chicago contributed.
FILE - Jack Dickinson, dressed in a chicken costume, looks to other protesters outside a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland, Ore., Monday, Oct. 20, 2025. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane,File)
Federal agents lobbed tear gas and flash bangs at protesters in front of the ICE building on Jan. 31, 2026, in Portland, Ore. (Allison Barr/The Oregonian via AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finalized an agreement with House Republicans Tuesday to testify in a House investigation into Jeffrey Epstein this month, bowing to the threat of a contempt of Congress vote against them.
Hillary Clinton will testify before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 26 and Bill Clinton will appear on Feb. 27. It will mark the first time that lawmakers have compelled a former president to testify.
The arrangement comes after months of negotiating between the two sides as Republicans sought to make the Clintons, both Democrats, a focal point in a House committee's investigation into Epstein, a convicted sex offender who killed himself in a New York jail cell in 2019, and Ghislaine Maxwell, his former girlfriend.
“We look forward to now questioning the Clintons as part of our investigation into the horrific crimes of Epstein and Maxwell, to deliver transparency and accountability for the American people and for survivors,” Rep. James Comer, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement.
For months, the Clintons resisted subpoenas from the committee, but House Republicans — with support from a few Democrats — had advanced criminal contempt of Congress charges to a potential vote this week. It threatened the Clintons with the potential for substantial fines and even prison time if they had been convicted.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday that any effort to hold them in contempt of Congress were "on pause.”
Even as the Clintons bowed to the pressure, the negotiating between GOP lawmakers and attorneys for the Clintons was marked by distrust as they wrangled over the details of the deposition. They agreed to have the closed-door depositions transcribed and recorded on video, Comer said.
The belligerence is likely to only grow as Republicans relish the opportunity to grill longtime political foes under oath.
Comer told The Associated Press that Republicans, in their inquiry with the Clintons, were “trying to figure out how Jeffrey Epstein was able to surround himself with all these rich and powerful people.”
Comer, a Kentucky Republican, also said that the Clintons had expressed a desire to make the proceedings public, but that he would insist on closed-door testimony with a later release of a transcript of the interviews. He added that he was open to holding a later public hearing if the Clintons wanted it.
Clinton, like a number of other high-powered men including President Donald Trump, had a well-documented relationship with Epstein in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Neither Trump nor Clinton has been credibly accused of wrongdoing in their interactions with the late financier.
Both Clintons have said they had no knowledge that Epstein was sexually abusing underage girls before prosecutors brought charges against him.
The Clintons had initially argued the subpoenas for their testimony were invalid and offered to submit sworn declarations on their limited knowledge of Epstein's crimes. But as Comer threatened to proceed with contempt of Congress charges, they began looking for an off-ramp.
Both Clintons have remained highly critical of how Comer has handled the Epstein investigation and argue that he is more focused on bringing them in for testimony rather than holding the Trump administration accountable for how it has handled the release of its files on Epstein.
However, as Comer advanced the contempt charges out of the House Oversight Committee last month, he found a number of Democrats willing to help. A younger generation of more progressive Democrats showed they had few connections with the Clintons, who led the Democratic Party for decades, and were more eager to show voters that they would stand for transparency in the Epstein investigation.
Nine Democrats out of 21 on the Oversight panel voted to advance charges against Bill Clinton, and three Democrats joined with Republicans to support the charges against Hillary Clinton. As the vote loomed this week, House Democratic leaders also made it clear they would not expend much political capital to rally votes against the contempt resolutions.
That left the Clintons with little choice but to agree to testify or face one of the most severe punishments Congress can give.
Congress has historically shown deference to former presidents. The Clintons' concession, however, prompted some Democrats to suggest that it set a precedent for former presidents to comply with congressional subpoenas.
“We look forward to using this same precedent when we take back the majority in November,” Rep. Daniel Goldman, a New York Democrat, said on social media.
Trump's attorneys successfully resisted a congressional subpoena in 2022, between his first and second terms, issued by a House committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, riot by a mob of his supporters at the U.S. Capitol. Trump’s lawyers cited decades of legal precedent they said shielded an ex-president from being ordered to appear before Congress, and the committee ultimately withdrew its subpoena.
At a signing for an unrelated bill later Tuesday, the president told reporters the depositions for the Clintons were “a shame” and said of Bill Clinton, “I always liked him.”
He also praised Hillary Clinton — his opponent in his first presidential election win in 2016 — for her debate skills and called her a “smart woman.”
This story has corrected a quote from President Donald Trump. Speaking about former President Bill Clinton, Trump said, “I always liked him,” not, “I always liked them.”
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., arrives for an early closed-door Republican Conference meeting on how to end the partial government shutdown after advancing criminal contempt of Congress charges against former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for defying a congressional subpoena to testify to his panel in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
FILE - President Bill Clinton, right, with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, at the 92nd Street Y, May 4, 2023, in New York. (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP, File)
