Here comes another federal court order.

I’m posting this and similar orders so that readers can see these primary documents themselves.

U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon in Portland issued a 22-page order on Tuesday at least temporarily haltlmh the use of tear gas, pepper balls, and related weapons in the absence of “an imminent threat of physical harm to a law enforcement officer or other person.”

Simon found that ICE agents had engaged in “persistent, excessive, and targeted violence” against peaceful demonstrators, journalists, and observers that violated their constitutional rights, including attacks on peaceful protestors during a demonstration over the weekend.

His order begins with a summary statement.

In a well-functioning constitutional democratic republic, free speech, courageous newsgathering, and nonviolent protest are all permitted, respected, and even celebrated. In an authoritarian regime, that is not the case. Our nation is now at a crossroads. We have been here
before and have previously returned to the right path, notwithstanding an occasional detour. 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. For that reason, and as more fully explained below, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.

Later, he discussed the importance of the First Amendment rights at issue.

The public interest in protecting First Amendment rights cannot be overemphasized. Freedom of speech, including through political protest, is “one of the chief distinctions that sets us apart from totalitarian regimes.” As the Ninth Circuit has recognized, “robust political discourse within a traditional public forum is the lifeblood of a democracy.” Protest particularly serves this core democratic function “when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger.” Indeed, the First Amendment tolerates societal “trouble” caused by protest because “our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom—this kind of openness—that is the basis of our national strength.” [legal citations omitted]

Simon’s temporary restraining order consists of three prohibitions:

a. No Enjoined Person may direct or use chemical or projectile munitions, including but not limited to kinetic impact projectiles, pepper ball or paintball guns, pepper or oleoresin capsicum spray, tear gas or other chemical irritants, soft nose rounds, 40mm or 37mm launchers, less lethal shotguns, and flashbang, Stinger, or rubber ball grenades, unless the specific target of such a weapon or device poses an imminent threat of physical harm to a law enforcement officer or other person.

b. No Enjoined Person may fire any munitions or use any weapons (including those described above) at the head, neck, or torso of any person, unless the officer is legally justified in using deadly force against that person.

c. No Enjoined Person may target any individual with a less lethal munition, if doing so would endanger any other individual who does not pose an imminent threat of physical harm to a law enforcement officer or other person. For purposes of illustration only, no Enjoined Person may use chemical or projectile munitions in response to trespassing, refusal to move, or refusal to obey a dispersal order.

The temporary restraining order applies until a scheduled hearing in his court in two weeks.

The full order appears below.

From a story from The Oregonian/OregonLive.com by Maxine Bernstein:

Federal officers have “repeatedly” used unnecessary and excessive force against protesters outside the federal immigration building in Portland, a former U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner says in a court filing.

Gil Kerlikowske, who led the agency for almost three years to early 2017, provided the assessment in support of an ACLU-backed lawsuit on behalf of protesters and freelance journalists.

They’re seeking a court order to prohibit Homeland Security officers from firing tear gas, flash-bang grenades, pepper balls and rubber bullets against passive demonstrators – or those trespassing or refusing to leave — unless someone poses an imminent threat.

“There appears to be a pervasive pattern of misuse of force by DHS against journalists, legal observers, and protesters who have been present at the protests at or around the ICE Building in Portland,” Kerlikoske concluded. “This pattern includes failure to give warnings, using unnecessary force in the absence of danger to law enforcement, and misuse of crowd-control weapons.”

In a sworn declaration filed in federal district court in Portland, Oregon, Kerlikowske said he reached his conclusion based on his long professional experience, agency rules and law enforcement “best practices,” along with a review of available reports, court records, depositions, photos and videos.

Opinion No. 1: DHS has exhibited a consistent pattern of deploying excessive force against protesters and journalists around the ICE Building, including by using force against people who are not engaged in threatening acts, misusing crowd-control munitions and teargas, and indiscriminately using force that needlessly injures people who pose no threat to law enforcement.

He spells out his analysis of the pervasive use of excessive force in the main part of his declaration, beginning on page 9 and ending on page 23.

A photo lifted from a video taken during a January 19, 2026 peaceful protest at Portland’s ICE facility shows an officer casually aiming pepper spray at people sitting or standing peacefully while posing no threat to law enforcement. Other officers fired multiple volleys of an estimated 100 or more pepper balls into another group of peaceful protesters who again posed no threat to the officers or the facility.

The full document follows.