Hexachloroethane gas in Minneapolis neighborhoods

1. What people on the ground say: green smoke, choking crowds

Multiple first‑person reports, social posts and on‑the‑ground journalism describe clouds of green smoke, heavy tear‑gas‑like effects that overwhelmed masks, and dramatic dispersal tactics by federal agents in Powderhorn and north Minneapolis, prompting community fear that something beyond standard CS tear gas was being used ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

2. Claims that the smoke was hexachloroethane and who is making them

Activist outlets, local threads and independent investigators have identified the green smoke as hexachloroethane (HC) and asserted it was deployed by federal agents; these claims appear in advocacy reporting and community‑driven monitoring such as Eyes on ICE and social media videos shared by witnesses ^{[3] [6] [2] [7]}. Those sources frame HC not as routine crowd control but as a military‑style smoke intended to create obscuring plumes and note the unusual green color as a signal differentiating HC from common CS/OC canisters ^{[3] [7]}.

3. Independent analysis and toxicity context cited by advocates

Forensic Architecture analysis, cited in activist reporting, is reported to have measured airborne concentrations that exceeded “Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health” (IDLH) thresholds, and post‑event testing allegedly found elevated metals like lead and zinc in storm drains, which critics say indicates environmental contamination tied to smoke munitions ^[3]. Historical and scientific sources used by advocates emphasize that HC is classified by some bodies as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen” and can impair the central nervous system and lungs, giving the chemical a different risk profile than short‑acting riot control agents ^{[8] [9]}.

4. What mainstream news reported and gaps in public confirmation

Mainstream outlets summarized events as ICE or federal agents deploying chemical irritants, flash bangs and less‑specified smoke canisters during crowd interactions, and reported arrests and clashes — but the articles in the provided set stop short of naming HC specifically or publishing a federal confirmation that HC munitions were used ^{[4] [5]}. Within the documents provided there is no cited DHS or ICE statement acknowledging hexachloroethane deployment or refuting the specific chemical identity claimed by activists, which leaves a verification gap ^{[4] [5]}.

5. Health, legal and historical frames invoked by sources

Sources place HC in a longer history of militarized smoke munitions: Wellcome Collection notes HC smoke’s use in past crowd and conflict contexts and the tension between its classification under chemical‑weapons conventions and its deployment as “riot control” domestically, while military toxicology reports document pulmonary and systemic health effects consistent with the concerns activists raise ^{[8] [9]}. Activist pieces emphasize Minneapolis policy history, noting local bans on particularly dangerous chemical agents by city police and suggesting federal forces exploit legal or operational loopholes — a claim that appears in activist reporting but is not independently corroborated in the mainstream pieces provided ^[3].

6. Assessment and limits of the available reporting

The available reporting establishes strong on‑the‑ground testimony, video evidence of green smoke and activist claims bolstered by an independent analysis cited by Forensic Architecture, and it highlights serious toxicological concerns tied to HC ^{[1] [2] [3] [8] [9]}. It does not, in these sources, include a federal admission, chain‑of‑custody chemical forensic reports published by neutral labs, or an official health advisory specifically naming hexachloroethane; therefore definitive proof of HC use in these particular incidents is asserted by advocates and supported by some independent analysis but not fully verified in the sources provided ^{[3] [4] [5]}.