Across the U.S., disturbing videos have surfaced showing intense and sometimes violent encounters between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and protesters. One such video, filmed in Hyattsville, Maryland, shows a man pinned to the ground by two ICE agents. The man pleads in both Spanish and English for help, while one officer fumbles and drops his gun—then appears to point it toward nearby bystanders.

According to Emily Covington, assistant director in ICE’s Office of Public Affairs, drawing a weapon can be used as a “de-escalation tactic.” But critics say such actions reflect the growing aggression within federal immigration enforcement.

A Shocking Scene Near Chicago

Another viral clip from Broadview, Illinois, a suburb just outside Chicago, shows a man identified as Pastor David Black being shot in the head with a pepper ball—a projectile filled with chemical irritants—outside an ICE facility. Pastor Black has since filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming excessive use of force.

In a separate incident, local CBS reporter Asal Rezaei said a masked ICE agent fired a pepper ball at her vehicle at the same Broadview facility, despite no protest taking place. Rezaei reported that she vomited for hours after the attack, prompting an ongoing investigation by Broadview Police.

“These are just the tip of the iceberg,” says Fred Tsao, senior policy counsel at the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. “We’ve seen people tackled, pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed, and even threatened with gunfire.”

Public Opinion vs. Federal Force

A New York Times/Siena University poll revealed that a majority of Americans disapprove of the Trump administration’s hardline immigration tactics. Yet, according to immigrant advocacy groups in Chicago, federal agents appear to be escalating their use of force.

“This administration seems more interested in heightening tensions instead of reducing them,” Tsao adds.

Last month, ICE officers conducted a massive apartment raid on Chicago’s South Side, breaking down doors and arresting dozens of people. Earlier this month, federal agents shot a woman in the city—and just weeks prior, they killed a man in a nearby suburb. In both cases, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claimed the victims had threatened officers. However, body camera footage from one incident showed an officer admitting that his injuries were “nothing major,” raising serious questions about the justification for lethal force.

Contradictions and Legal Challenges

In the woman’s case, her attorney says bodycam footage contradicts DHS’s version of events. Despite this, a grand jury indicted her and another individual for allegedly “impeding and intimidating” a federal officer.

“What we’re seeing is an escalation of violence and excessive force by ICE officers,” says Ed Yohnka, director of communications and public policy at the ACLU of Illinois. The organization has filed lawsuits accusing the Trump administration of violating protesters’ constitutional rights.

In response, Covington’s statement to NPR defended ICE agents, claiming they are “highly trained and act according to law and policy.” She also cited an alleged increase in assaults against ICE officers. However, Colorado Public Radio reporting suggests those numbers are exaggerated.

Experts Condemn the Tactics

Gil Kerlikowske, former commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection under the Obama administration, says ICE agents are not equipped to handle urban policing situations.

“They lack the training and skillset to operate in dense city environments,” says Kerlikowske, who also served as Seattle’s police chief. “Good policing depends on trust, cooperation, and de-escalation—not intimidation and force. I couldn’t be more disappointed.”

Kerlikowske argues that the aggressive tactics being used in cities like Chicago are “completely unnecessary” and risk undermining public trust in law enforcement.

What the Law Says About Use of Force

Legally, both federal and local officers must follow the “objectively reasonable” standard when using force. That means the officer’s response must match the perceived level of threat at the time.

But as Seth Stoughton, a law professor at the University of South Carolina, explains, the phrase “objectively reasonable” can be ambiguous. “It doesn’t mean anything without context,” he says. “What might be reasonable in one situation could be excessive in another.”

According to DHS’s own policy, officers should use force only when no other safe or feasible option exists. The guidelines emphasize “de-escalation” and “respect for human life.” But when officers fire pepper balls at unarmed civilians or reporters, many argue those principles are being ignored.

Legal vs. Legitimate Actions

Even when force is technically legal, Stoughton says the deeper question is one of legitimacy.
“Just because something is constitutional doesn’t mean it’s right,” he says. “People aren’t asking whether these actions align with the Fourth Amendment—they’re asking whether they’re socially or democratically legitimate.”

This distinction highlights the growing divide between law enforcement justification and public moral judgment. For many Chicago residents and immigrant advocates, the issue isn’t whether ICE can use force—it’s whether they should.

The Fight for Accountability

The ACLU of Illinois and other immigrant rights organizations argue that ICE’s violent actions violate the Constitution. They are pushing for greater oversight, transparency, and accountability for federal officers operating in urban environments.

“These officers are not trained to handle protests or community interactions,” says Yohnka. “They treat civilian spaces like battle zones, which endangers everyone involved.”

Advocates are also urging citizens to document any encounters they witness between ICE agents and the public. Videos, photos, and eyewitness reports can serve as crucial evidence when investigating potential abuses.

A Call for Change

The rise in aggressive enforcement tactics has sparked national debate about the future of immigration policy and law enforcement accountability. While federal agencies defend their actions as necessary for security, critics argue that such methods erode community trust and fuel fear among immigrants.

For many Chicago residents, the question remains: How far is too far?

As the lawsuits mount and investigations unfold, one thing is clear—what’s happening at ICE facilities in Chicago and across the country is not just about immigration enforcement. It’s about how power is used, justified, and held accountable in America’s democracy.