Have there been any similar incidents of ICE agents using pepper spray on law enforcement?

1. What the claims assert — a short, unforgiving summary of the allegations

The original claim asks whether ICE agents have used pepper spray on law enforcement; the assembled reporting confirms frequent ICE use of chemical agents in crowd-control and enforcement settings but finds no direct, corroborated instance of ICE officers intentionally pepper‑spraying local, state, or federal law‑enforcement officers as their target. Investigations and video documentation focus predominantly on ICE deploying tear gas, pepper balls, and pepper spray against protesters, journalists, and civilian bystanders near facilities such as Broadview, Illinois, and during street confrontations, and several accounts note that police have been exposed incidentally when those munitions were used ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Fact checks compiled in October 2025 conclude there is no credible record of ICE deliberately pepper‑spraying police, though headline descriptions of chaotic clashes sometimes conflate who sprayed whom ^[4].

2. Where the reporting documents ICE chemical munitions and collateral exposure to officers

Multiple news outlets documented ICE agents using chemical munitions in Chicago and elsewhere where those deployments also impacted local officers, sometimes unintentionally. Video and eyewitness accounts described tear gas and pepper‑ball rounds fired by federal agents during protests near ICE facilities, and Broadview Police reported their officers were exposed to those chemicals during clashes, elevating safety concerns for responders and complicating incident control ^{[1] [3]}. Reporting from October 2025 recounts instances where police sought medical attention or temporarily retreated after exposure, and some local chiefs publicly criticized federal tactics as creating hazards for all responders, which indicates operational spillover even where police were not the intended targets ^{[1] [3]}.

3. Why reporters and fact‑checkers say there’s no confirmed instance of ICE pepper‑spraying police

Fact‑checks and multiple contemporaneous articles emphasize that while chaotic confrontations occurred, the available evidence does not support a claim that ICE agents intentionally targeted law‑enforcement with pepper spray. Analysts note that videos frequently show clouds of chemical agents in mixed crowds and that attribution of who deployed the specific agent is often unclear; fact‑check pieces conclude there is no verified video, official admission, or corroborated eyewitness account showing ICE spraying police intentionally ^[4]. News outlets that documented ICE chemical use on civilians noted incidents where local officers were hit by the same munitions, but those reports frame officer exposure as collateral, not as evidence of deliberate targeting ^{[1] [3]}.

4. Documented civilian victims and the pattern of ICE using chemical force

Independent reporting and investigative pieces detail multiple incidents in which ICE personnel used pepper spray or pepper‑ball rounds against civilians, including protesters, journalists, legal observers, and uninvolved residents, with specific episodes in Broadview and other cities cited; one account includes a father and infant who said they were pepper‑sprayed in a Sam’s Club parking lot, though DHS disputed or denied some claims ^{[5] [2]}. These reports establish a pattern of ICE deploying chemical force against non‑law‑enforcement targets, generating public outcry, internal agency reviews, and calls for oversight, and they underscore why any exposure to officers is plausible amid those tactics ^{[2] [5]}.

5. Agency responses, denials, and competing narratives that shape interpretation

DHS and ICE statements have sometimes denied specific civilian complaints while acknowledging use of crowd‑control munitions in certain operations, producing conflicting narratives between federal authorities and local officials or witnesses; this divergence complicates establishing direct intent when officers were affected. Some federal statements emphasize that agents themselves were targets of attacks or faced threats, framing the use of chemical agents as defensive, while local law‑enforcement leaders highlight the danger posed to all responders by indiscriminate munitions ^{[3] [1]}. Readers should note that advocacy outlets stress civil‑liberties harms, while government communications stress operational necessity, creating predictable agendas that influence which incidents are amplified or downplayed ^{[2] [4]}.

6. Bottom line: confirmed exposures, no verified intentional spraying of police, and what’s missing

The evidence through October 2025 confirms ICE has used pepper spray and other chemical munitions in ways that have exposed law‑enforcement officers as collateral, and it records multiple civilian pepper‑spray incidents attributed to ICE, but it does not produce a verified instance of ICE agents deliberately pepper‑spraying other law‑enforcement officers. Key missing elements are incontrovertible video showing purposeful targeting of police, admissions by agents, or conclusive chain‑of‑custody investigations tying a specific act to ICE intent; absent those, the most defensible conclusion is that officers have been affected by ICE chemical deployments, but intentional pepper‑spraying of police by ICE remains unproven in the reviewed reporting ^{[1] [4]}.