UPDATE: The ACLU and other legal groups are pushing back against the use of tear gas to disperse anti-ICE protesters in Chicago, claiming it was unjustified and violated court orders. The incident unfolded on October 24, 2025, as demonstrators blocked a road, reportedly throwing rocks and fireworks at law enforcement.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated that chemical munitions were deployed after protesters allegedly began attacking agents with hard objects. In a Friday post on X, the DHS characterized the actions of the demonstrators as aggressive, claiming they “shot at our agents with commercial artillery shell fireworks” and struck a Border Patrol official in the head.
In a court filing, lawyers representing the protesters argued that law enforcement acted “without justification,” asserting that the use of chemical agents violated an October 17 court order prohibiting such measures unless safety was at risk. They urged U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis to take swift action, citing the need to address the “flagrancy” of this alleged violation.
“[We] wanted to bring it to the Court’s attention as soon as possible given the flagrancy of the apparent violation,”
the attorneys wrote, emphasizing the urgency of their request.
The incident escalated as protesters reportedly boxed in immigration agents with a truck, prompting warnings from law enforcement. Despite repeated advisories about the potential use of crowd control munitions, individuals continued to approach, leading to the deployment of tear gas.
DHS officials defended their actions, stating that the deployment of chemical munitions was necessary to protect both law enforcement and the public, asserting that agents acted in accordance with policy.
This legal battle comes amid growing tensions surrounding protests against ICE actions and allegations that federal agents have infringed on First Amendment rights. The lawsuit, which includes journalists and media organizations, accuses the government of extreme brutality aimed at silencing dissent.
As this situation develops, the legal ramifications and the ongoing debate over law enforcement’s response to protests will be closely watched. The court is expected to address the attorneys’ claims soon, and further developments are anticipated in the coming days.
Stay tuned for updates as this story unfolds.
