law enforcement officer

Protesters at ICE facility object to barricades, agents detain multiple people

Federal agents detained multiple people Friday near an immigration facility outside Chicago that has frequently been targeted by protesters during President Trump’s administration’s surge of immigration enforcement this fall.

A crowd grew over several hours, some riled by newly installed barricades to separate them from law enforcement officers stationed outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing facility in Broadview, about 12 miles (19 kilometers) west of Chicago.

Some protesters have aimed to block vehicles from going in or out of the area in recent weeks, part of growing pushback to a surge of immigration enforcement that begin in early September. Federal agents have repeatedly fired tear gas, pepper balls and other projectiles toward crowds and at least five people have faced federal charges after being arrested in those clashes.

Local law enforcement stepped up their own presence Friday, closing several streets around the facility and putting Illinois State Police officers wearing riot helmets and holding batons on patrol. The state police set up concrete barriers Thursday night to segregate protesters and designate spaces to demonstrate.

It was unclear how many people were detained Friday. One man was seen struggling on the ground with agents after he appeared to break through a line into the roadway and in front of a vehicle.

Mostly reporters and a handful of protesters stood within the designated protest zone in front of the ICE facility as helicopters hovered overhead.

“Every week, ICE escalates its violence against us,” said Demi Palecek, a military veteran and candidate for Congress. “With this level of escalation, it’s only a matter of time before someone is killed.”

Several demonstrators said they were frustrated by the designated protest zone, saying keeping them off public streets violated their First Amendment right to free speech. Others were angered by officers from local or state agencies standing shoulder-to-shoulder with federal officers, including Homeland Security Investigations, ICE, the Bureau of Prisons and others.

Most ignored the zone to protest on the other side of the facility, where Illinois State Police officers held them back.

Jonny Bishop, a 28-year-old former teacher from Palatine, Illinois, said attempting to designate a “free speech zone” infringes on protesters’ First Amendment rights.

“As the day went on, we were progressively pushed, not just by ICE but also by Broadview Police Department,” he said. “We’ve done these things peacefully…But our rights are being violated.”

Bishop, from a Mexican immigrant family, said he has been hit by tear gas and pepper balls at previous protests. He said the main contrast between Friday’s protests and earlier efforts is local, county and state law enforcement agencies working alongside federal agents.

“ICE acts with impunity,” he said. “They know that they can shoot at us. They can tear gas us. And Broadview Police Department is not going to do anything.”

At one point, state police officers joined Border Patrol in advancing toward protesters, forming a larger perimeter around the building. Some protesters yelled in law enforcement officers’ faces while the officers grabbed them by the shoulders and pushed them back.

Fernando and O’Connor write for the Associated Press. O’Connor reported from Springfield, Ill. AP journalists Erin Hooley and Laura Bargfeld contributed to this report.

Source link

Want to protect officers — and our democracy? Ban masks

If you thought Jimmy Kimmel saved free speech, think again.

To hear President Trump tell it, no one, especially law enforcement officers, is safe from the dangers caused by opposing his policies — and he’s ready to do something about it.

“This political violence is not a series of isolated incidents and does not emerge organically,” Trump wrote in a new executive order. “A new law enforcement strategy that investigates all participants in these criminal and terroristic conspiracies — including the organized structures, networks, entities, organizations, funding sources, and predicate actions behind them — is required.”

Of course, despite his menacing tone, I agree with Trump that politically motivated violence against law enforcement — or anyone, be it Charlie Kirk or immigrant detainees — is reprehensible and completely unacceptable.

The deadly shooting in Dallas this week, which Trump referred to in the order, is a tragedy and any political violence should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the many laws on the books that protect our public servants, and the public at large.

But criticizing government overreach is not inciting violence, and calls for Democrats to stop attacking Trump’s policies are just calls to silence dissent — one more attack on free speech at a moment when it’s clear this administration is intent on demolishing opposition.

If we are serious about preventing further political violence, trust in our justice system must be a priority. And you know what’s really eroding trust? Scary masked agents on our streets who refuse to even say what agency they work for.

In recent days, about 6,700 federal workers from agencies outside of ICE have been pulled into its immigration mission, according to the non-partisan Niskanen Center.

The anxiety brought on by an unaccountable and unknowable federal force, one that is expected to grow by thousands in coming years, is what is raising the temperature in American politics far more than the words from either side, though I am not here to argue that words don’t have power.

Ending the fear that our justice system is devolving into secrecy and lawlessness will reduce tension, and the potential for violence. Want to protect officers — and our democracy?

Ban masks.

“Listen, I understand that it being a law enforcement officer is scary,” former Capitol police officer Harry Dunn told me Wednesday during a press event for the immigration organization America’s Voice.

Dunn was attacked, beaten and called racial slurs during the political violence on Jan. 6, 2021.

“Nobody ever signed up to be harassed, to be targeted. That should never happen,” he said.

But Dunn said he’d never don a mask, because it harms that public trust, that mission to serve and protect.

When officers cover their faces and demand to be nameless and faceless, “They are terrorizing … with something just as simple as a mask,” he said.

Which is why California just passed a law attempting to ban such masks, effective next year — though it will likely be challenged in court, and federal authorities have already said they will ignore it.

“We’re not North Korea, Mr. President. We’re not the Soviet Union. This is the United States of America, and I’m really proud of the state of California and our state of mind that we’re pushing back against these authoritarian tendencies and actions of this administration,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom before signing the bill.

The argument in favor of masks is that some officers are afraid to do their jobs without them, fearing they or their families will be identified and targeted. The Department of Homeland security claims that assaults on officers are up 1,000%, though it’s unclear what data produced that figure.

“Every time I’m in a room with our law enforcement officers, I’m talking to them before they go out on our streets, I’m just overwhelmed by the fact that all of these young men and women have families that they all want to go home to,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said. “(P)eople like Gavin Newsom are making it much more dangerous for them just to go do their job.”

Federal immigration authorities are not required by their agencies to wear masks. Not ski masks, not balaclavas, not even medical masks — which many officers refused to don even during the pandemic.

Like the choice to become a federal law enforcement officer, hiding their identity while doing their duty is a personal decision. Some agents aren’t masked. There is no rule to bring clarity, only leaders pushing the false narrative that protecting officers is impossible at this moment of unrest, and they must do what they see fit to protect themselves.

Which raises the question, why not help all officers feel safe enough to go unmasked, rather than allowing some to work in a fearful environment? Surely, if some officers feel safe enough to go about their duties in a regular fashion, there must be something their leaders can do to promote that sense of strength among the ranks rather than cave to the timidity of anonymity and helplessness?

“Things can be done,” Gabriel Chin told me. He’s a professor of law at UC Davis and an expert on criminal procedure.

“The nice thing about being a law enforcement officer is if somebody does something illegal to you, you have the resources to investigate and have them criminally charged,” Chin said. “But you know, this kind of thing has happened to judges and police and prosecutors, apart from ICE, for some years, unfortunately, and yet we don’t have masked judges and masked prosecutors.”

In 2020, for example, the son of New Jersey judge Esther Salas was shot and killed by a self-described men’s rights lawyer who came to her front door and had a list of other judges in his car.

Salas did not respond by demanding judges become faceless. Instead, she successfully lobbied for greater protection of all judges nationwide.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Republican-appointee who was the first to block Trump’s executive order axing birthright citizenship, has spoken publicly, along with five other federal judges, about continuing threats facing his brethren, including both a recent “swatting” incident and a bomb threat against him and his family.

“It’s just been stunning to me how much damage has been done to the reputation of our judiciary because some political actors think that they can gain some advantage by attacking the independence of the judiciary and threatening the rule of law,” he told Reuters — an attack coming from the right.

Speaking at the same event, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island said that like many other judges, he’s been harassed with pizzas being sent to his home address — including “one in the name of Daniel Anderl,” Reuters reported. That’s the name of Salas’ murdered son.

Just this week, a Santa Monica man was arrested and charged with doxxing an ICE lawyer.

But McConnell’s face is still visible when he takes the bench, as is Coughenour’s and every other judge and prosecutor. They face those who come before them for justice, because that is what justice requires.

What ultimately keeps them — and our system — safe is our collective belief that, even if imperfect, it has rules, stated and implied.

The most basic of these is that we face each other, even if we are afraid.

Source link

ICE officer shoots, kills suspect who dragged him with car near Chicago, Homeland Security says

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot a man who officials said tried to evade arrest Friday in a Chicago suburb by driving his car at officers and dragging one of them.

The shooting just outside the city follows days of threats by the Trump administration to surge immigration enforcement in the nation’s third-largest city and less than a week into an operation labeled “Midway Blitz” by federal officials targeting the so-called sanctuary policies in Chicago and Illinois.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a news release that the officer was trying to arrest a man who had a history of reckless driving, but he refused officers’ orders and instead drove his car at them. An ICE officer who was hit and dragged by the car felt his life was threatened and opened fire, the department said.

ICE said both the officer and the driver from the shooting in the Franklin Park suburb, about 18 miles west of Chicago, were taken to a hospital, where the driver was pronounced dead.

“We are praying for the speedy recovery of our law enforcement officer. He followed his training, used appropriate force, and properly enforced the law to protect the public and law enforcement,” said spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, said he is aware of the shooting and demanded “a full, factual accounting of what’s happened today to ensure transparency and accountability.”

Video from the scene shows police tape and traffic cones blocking off parts of the street where a large food distribution truck and gray car can be seen from a distance. Multiple law enforcement vehicles were surrounding the area.

Erendira Rendón, chief program officer at a local advocacy group called the Resurrection Project, said the shooting “shows us the real danger that militarized enforcement creates in our neighborhoods.”

“A community member is dead, and an officer was injured,” Rendón said in a statement. “These are outcomes that serve no public safety purpose and leave entire communities traumatized. … When federal agents conduct unaccountable operations in our communities, everyone becomes less safe.”

Chicagoans, meanwhile, have been preparing for weekend Mexican Independence Day celebrations that include parades, festivals, street parties and car caravans, despite the potential immigration crackdown.

McLaughlin said that “viral social media videos and activists encouraging illegal aliens to resist law enforcement” have made the work of ICE officers more dangerous.

Santana and Fernando write for the Associated Press. Santana reported from Washington.

Source link

California lawmakers pass bill banning law enforcement officers from covering their faces

The California Legislature on Thursday passed a pair of bills to prohibit on-duty law enforcement officers, including federal immigration agents, from masking their faces and to require them to identify themselves.

Senate Bill 627, written by Sens. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Jesse Arreguín (D-Berkeley), includes exceptions for SWAT teams and others. The measure was introduced after the Trump administration ordered immigration raids throughout the Los Angeles area earlier this year.

Federal officers in army-green neck gaiters or other face coverings have jumped out of vans and cars to detain individuals across California this summer as part of President Trump’s mass deportation program, prompting a wave of criticism from Democratic leaders.

Representatives for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security defend the face coverings, arguing that identifying officers subjects to them to retaliation and violence.

If supported by Gov. Gavin Newsom, the law would apply to local and federal officers, but not state officers such as California Highway Patrol officers. Wiener, when asked about that exemption on the Senate floor, declined to elaborate.

Leaders in Los Angeles County are exploring a similar measure to ban masks despite some legal experts’ view that the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution dictates that federal law takes precedence over state law.

The bill’s backers argue that permitting officers to disguise themselves creates scenarios where impostors may stop and detain migrants, which undermines public trust and ultimately hinders legitimate law enforcement operations.

“The idea that in California we would have law enforcement officers running around with ski masks is terrifying,” Wiener said in a brief interview. “It destroys confidence in law enforcement.”

Wiener’s bill allows exceptions for masks, including for undercover officers. Medical coverings are also allowed. .

Senate Bill 805, a measure by Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Alhambra) that targets immigration officers who are in plainclothes but don’t identify themselves, also passed the state Legislature on Thursday.

Her bill requires law enforcement officers in plain clothes to display their agency, as well as either a badge number or name, with some exemptions.

Source link

Former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman lies in state as shooting suspect appears in court

Former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman laid in state in the Minnesota Capitol rotunda on Friday while the man charged with killing her and her husband, and wounding a state senator and his wife, made a brief court appearance in a suicide prevention suit.

Hortman, a Democrat, is the first woman and one of fewer than 20 Minnesotans accorded the honor. She laid in state with her husband, Mark, and their golden retriever, Gilbert. Her husband was also killed in the June 14 attack, and Gilbert was seriously wounded and had to be euthanized. It was the first time a couple has laid in state at the Capitol, and the first time for a dog.

The Hortmans’ caskets and the dog’s urn were arranged in the center of the rotunda, under the Capitol dome, with law enforcement officers keeping watch on either side.

The Capitol was open for the public to pay their respects from noon to 5 p.m. Friday. House TV was livestreaming the viewing. A private funeral is set for 10:30 a.m. Saturday. The service will be livestreamed on the Department of Public Safety’s YouTube channel.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris will fly to Minnesota for the funeral but won’t have a speaking role, according to her personal office. Harris expressed her condolences this past week to Hortman’s adult children, and spoke with Gov. Tim Walz, her 2024 running mate, who extended an invitation on behalf of the Hortman family, her office said.

His hearing takes a twist

The man accused of killing the Hortmans and wounding another Democratic lawmaker and his wife made a short court appearance Friday to face charges for what the chief federal prosecutor for Minnesota has called “a political assassination.” Vance Boelter, 57, of Green Isle, surrendered near his home the night of June 15 after what authorities have called the largest search in Minnesota history.

An unshaven Boelter was brought in wearing just a green padded suicide prevention suit and orange slippers. Federal defender Manny Atwal asked Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko to continue the hearing until next Thursday. She said Boelter has been sleep deprived while on suicide watch in the Sherburne County Jail, and that it has been difficult to communicate with him as a result.

“Your honor, I haven’t really slept in about 12 to 14 days,” Boelter told the judge. And he denied being suicidal. “I’ve never been suicidal and I am not suicidal now.”

Atwal told the court that Boelter had been in what’s known as a “Gumby suit,” without undergarments, ever since his transfer to the jail after his first court appearance on June 16. She said the lights are on in his area 24 hours a day, doors slam frequently, the inmate in the next cell spreads feces on the walls, and the smell drifts to Boelter’s cell.

The attorney said transferring him to segregation instead, and giving him a normal jail uniform, would let him get some sleep, restore some dignity, and let him communicate better. The judge agreed.

Prosecutors did not object to the delay and said they also had concerns about the jail conditions.

The acting U.S. attorney for Minnesota, Joseph Thompson, told reporters afterward that he did not think Boelter had attempted to kill himself.

The case continues

Boelter did not enter a plea. Prosecutors need to secure a grand jury indictment first, before his arraignment, which is when a plea is normally entered.

According to the federal complaint, police video shows Boelter outside the Hortmans’ home and captures the sound of gunfire. And it says security video shows Boelter approaching the front doors of two other lawmakers’ homes dressed as a police officer.

His lawyers have declined to comment on the charges, which could carry the federal death penalty. Thompson said last week that no decision has been made. Minnesota abolished its death penalty in 1911. The Death Penalty Information Center says a federal death penalty case hasn’t been prosecuted in Minnesota in the modern era, as best as it can tell.

Boelter also faces separate murder and attempted murder charges in state court that could carry life without parole, assuming that county prosecutors get their own indictment for first-degree murder. But federal authorities intend to use their power to try Boelter first.

Other victims and alleged targets

Authorities say Boelter shot and wounded Democratic state Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, at their home in Champlin before shooting and killing the Hortmans in their home in the northern Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Park, a few miles away.

Federal prosecutors allege Boelter also stopped at the homes of two other Democratic lawmakers. Prosecutors also say he listed dozens of other Democrats as potential targets, including officials in other states. Friends described Boelter as an evangelical Christian with politically conservative views. But prosecutors have declined so far to speculate on a motive.

Boelter’s wife speaks out

Boelter’s wife, Jenny, issued a statement through her own lawyers Thursday saying she and her children are “absolutely shocked, heartbroken and completely blindsided,” and expressing sympathy for the Hortman and Hoffman families. She is not in custody and has not been charged.

“This violence does not align at all with our beliefs as a family,” her statement said. “It is a betrayal of everything we hold true as tenets of our Christian faith. We are appalled and horrified by what occurred and our hearts are incredibly heavy for the victims of this unfathomable tragedy.”

An FBI agent’s affidavit described the Boelters as “preppers,” people who prepare for major or catastrophic incidents. Investigators seized 48 guns from his home, according to search warrant documents.

While the FBI agent’s affidavit said law enforcement stopped Boelter’s wife as she traveled with her four children north of the Twin Cities in Onamia on the day of the shootings, she said in her statement that she was not pulled over. She said that after she got a call from authorities, she immediately drove to meet them at a nearby gas station and has fully cooperated with investigators.

“We thank law enforcement for apprehending Vance and protecting others from further harm,” she said.

Karnowski writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

As Marines reach L.A., experts say: ‘This could spiral out of control’

After days of fiery protest against federal immigration raids, Los Angeles residents and officials braced for the arrival of hundreds of U.S. Marines on Tuesday in what some called an unprecedented and potentially explosive deployment of active-duty troops with hazy mission objectives.

As Trump administration officials vowed to crack down on “rioters, looters and thugs,” state and local officials decried the mobilization of 700 troops from the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, calling it a clear violation of law and civility. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass even likened the deployment to “an experiment” that nobody asked to be a part of.

According to the U.S. Northern Command, which oversees troops based in the United States, the Marines will join “seamlessly” with National Guard troops under “Task Force 51” — the military’s designation of the Los Angeles forces. The Marines, like the Guard, they said, “have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control and rules for the use of force.”

Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot told The Times on Tuesday that the Marines in Los Angeles were limited in their authority, deployed only to defend federal property and federal personnel. They do not have arrest power, he said.

“They are not law enforcement officers, and they do not have the authority to make arrests,” Guillot said. “There are very unique situations where they could detain someone … but they could only detain that person long enough to hand it off to a proper law enforcement official.”

But military experts have raised practical concerns about the unclear parameters of the Marines’ objective. They also warn that sending in Marines without a request from a governor — a highly unusual step that has not been made since the civil rights era in 1965 — could potentially inflame the situation.

U.S. Marines are trained for overseas conflict zones, with deployments in recent decades in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. But the roles they have played in those nations — including providing artillery support to coalition forces fighting against Islamic State militants and advising and training local security forces — are quite different from what they might face as they confront protesters in Los Angeles.

“Marines are trained to fight, that’s the first thing they’re trained to do,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a military research group. “So I think you do have a little bit of mismatch in skills here.”

“In a crisis, when they’re forced to make a snap decision, do they have enough training and experience to make the one that de-escalates the situation rather than escalates it? I think that’s a question mark,” Kavanagh said.

Hours after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told congressional lawmakers Tuesday that the mobilization of troops to Los Angeles to curtail protests would cost $134 million, President Trump told U.S. Army troops at Ft. Bragg in North Carolina that he deployed thousands of National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines “to protect federal law enforcement from the attacks of a vicious and violent mob.”

But city and state officials have repeatedly said that troops are not necessary to contain the protests.

On Monday night, California Gov. Gavin Newsom called the deployment of Marines “a blatant abuse of power” and filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the deployment.

Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell warned that — “absent clear coordination” — the prospect of Marines descending on Los Angeles “presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city.”

However, Guillot said coordinating among different agencies “hasn’t been a challenge to us at all.”

“I think people understand that we’re there for a very specific purpose,” he said. “We’re very highly trained, professional and disciplined, and people have been very cooperative so far.”

By Tuesday afternoon, all 700 Marines had arrived in the Greater Los Angeles area, Guillot said. At least one convoy of U.S. Marine vehicles from Twentynine Palms had arrived at Orange County’s Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach under police escort.

The mobilized Marines and National Guard troops will be stationed in facilities across the region, including Seal Beach, Los Alamitos and a number of National Guard armories, Guillot said. He didn’t provide further details.

Over the last few days, National Guard members have already been stationed at a few federal buildings and have accompanied Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on missions, Guillot said. He expects Marines will be mobilized on the ground Wednesday, if not Tuesday evening, after wrapping up final training.

It is rare for U.S. Marines to be sent to an American city. The last time they were deployed in the U.S. was after riots broke out in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of four LAPD officers who were recorded beating a Black motorist, Rodney G. King.

Back then, President George H.W. Bush acted at the request of California Gov. Pete Wilson and Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley after what The Times described as “three days of the worst urban unrest in Los Angeles history.”

Deploying Marines to Los Angeles is not only a dramatic escalation of events, but also potentially illegal, according to Abigail Hall, a defense scholar and senior fellow at the Independent Institute, a nonprofit think tank based in Oakland.

Bringing in the Marines to L.A., she said, violates the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law enacted after the Civil War, which forbids active-duty federal forces to provide regular civilian law enforcement unless authorized by Congress or the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

Trump has yet to invoke the Insurrection Act.

“I don’t see any way that this is not a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act,” Hall said. “We’re not at war, we’ve not invoked the Insurrection Act of 1807 — and even if we did, that’s what the National Guard is for. It’s not what the Marines are for.”

Kavanagh didn’t comment on the deployment’s legality, but called it unprecedented in modern times. She worried that could make its mission and parameters unclear for troops.

The last time the military was deployed without a governor’s request or approval, military experts said, was to facilitate court-ordered desegregation in Southern states during the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Kori Schake, senior fellow and director of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, said the Trump administration appeared to be trying out a new way to get around the restrictions on domestic law enforcement by the American military.

“The authority the president is claiming is his constitutional authority under what’s called the Take Care clause … he’s claiming the federal responsibility to protect federal agents and federal property operations. That authority has never been tested in court.”

Such an approach, Schake said, was fraught with more than legal risk.

“If violence burgeons, tempers are running high, the Marines are armed, this could spiral out of control,” Schake said.

The L.A. deployment, Kavanagh said, could also be a jarring mission for Marines who signed up to go abroad and defend America’s freedom — and instead are facing off with fellow citizens.

“Does everyone know the rules of engagement?” Kavanagh asked of the L.A. mission. “Are they clear?”

She also worried that the troops deployed to L.A. are likely to have some of the most limited experience. Guard members are not full time and undergo less frequent training, and Marines retain the youngest service members of all the military branches. Nearly three-quarters of active-duty enlisted members of the Marine Corps are 25 or younger, according to a 2022 Department of Defense report. The average age is 24, compared with 27 for the Army and 28 for the Air Force.

Schake, however, pointed out that although Marines may be the youngest cohort in the military, they are well trained in de-escalation tactics.

“The wars that the United States has been fighting for the last 25 years have required incredible discipline on the use of force by the military in Afghanistan and in Iraq in particular, so they are trained for de-escalating conflict,” Schake said. “I think actually, it’s quite possible they’re better trained at de-escalation of violence than the police forces are.”

In that sense, Schake said she was less worried about violence on the streets than about “creeping authoritarianism.”

“The way the president, that Homeland secretary, the secretary of Defense, the White House press spokesman are talking is incendiary and reckless,” Schake said.

“They’re calling the city of Los Angeles — where 1 in 40 Americans live — a hellscape, and everybody in the city a criminal. They’re describing protests that are really peaceful as an insurrection. And that’s a very reckless thing to do in a difficult situation.”

Times staff writers Hayley Smith and Christopher Buchanan contributed to this report.

Source link