'Surprising Savagery': US Court Prohibits Attacks On Journalists Covering ICE Protests

The following article was made possible by paid subscribers of The Dissenter. Become a subscriber and support journalism on press freedom, whistleblowing, and government secrecy.

A United States court concluded that border patrol and other federal agents “unleashed crowd control weapons indiscriminately and with surprising savagery,” targeting journalists who were covering protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Los Angeles. 

U.S. District Judge Hernán Vera issued an injunction against federal agents to prevent them from “dispersing, threatening, or assaulting any person whom they know or reasonably should know” is a journalist. (Vera extended the injunction to cover legal observers, too.)

On June 18, 2025, three journalists—Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, Ryanne Mena, and Lexis Olivier-Ray of L.A. Taco—sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. The Los Angeles Press Club, the NewsGuild - Communication Workers of America, Charles Xu, a legal observer for the National Lawyers Guild, and two protesters, Benjamin Climer and Abigail Olmeda also joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs. 

The complaint [PDF] filed by the the ACLU of Southern California alleged that DHS had “specifically directed its force at people easily identifiable—and, on information and belief, actually identified by DHS agents—as peaceful protesters, legal advocates, and members of the press.”

It described horrific conduct by ICE, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and Federal Protective Services (FPS) agents, which was “part of a longstanding pattern [of] using physical assault and threats of violence to limit the number of dissenting viewpoints against government actions while simultaneously preventing the press from telling the public about the [officers’] conduct.”

The court agreed that agents working for Noem and DHS engaged in retaliation against plaintiffs for engaging in “constitutionally protected activities,” in violation of their First Amendment rights. 

Furthermore, the court rejected “baseless accusations” that plaintiffs had participated in “violent riots.” Each plaintiff “attended the protests to cover or observe federal immigration enforcement actions or to peacefully protest raids in their own communities.” 

Noem and DHS have “failed to adduce a shred of evidence that any plaintiff engaged in violence,” Vera declared.

“Neither can defendants meaningfully dispute that being subjected to rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper balls, and other crowd control weapons would deter individuals of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in the protected activity,” Vera added. “In some cases, the injuries inflicted by defendants have prevented journalists, legal observers, and protesters from persisting in their activities.”

Vera referred to “an avalanche of evidence” that supported the claim that agents engaged in “a common and widespread practice of violating the First Amendment rights of journalists, legal observers, and protesters.”

Border Patrol agents shot Mena in the head with a rubber bullet while she was 30 to 50 feet away from protesters. The day before she was “struck by a pepper ball.” Again, Mena was about 20 feet away from where people were protesting. 

Ray was “targeted by volleys of pepper balls while taking cover near a group of media trucks about 50 feet away from the line of officers,” while Beckner-Carmitchel was “hit in the head with a tear gas canister while filming protesters from over 20 feet away.”

“In a disturbing number of cases,” federal agents “hit” plaintiffs in the head. 

Importantly, the court recognized that the rights violations would likely continue without action by the court. 

Vera wrote, “Belying defendants’ assurances that federal arrests at protests [have] ‘dwindled’ [since] the first few weeks of June, the record instead shows that defendants have used retaliatory force against journalists, legal observers, and protestors on at least five occasions—including on the same day that the court denied plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order.” 

“In these historic times, when press freedoms are under attack, this decision is a powerful reminder that journalists must be protected, not met with violence,” Mena said. “By granting this relief, the court has affirmed the journalistic duty to our communities and the essential role of a free press.” 

"I've spent countless hours compiling evidence of police misconduct toward journalists in Los Angeles. The attacks this summer have been relentless,” declared Adam Rose, the chair of the press rights committee for the Los Angeles Press Club. 

“It was a relief to hear Judge Vera acknowledge a ‘mountain of evidence’ as we sat in his courtroom last month. This decision affirms our right to be free from violence while doing our jobs.”