What are the protocols for ICE agents using pepper balls during arrests?
Executive summary
Federal agents in multiple recent incidents have deployed pepper balls and other “less-lethal” munitions at ICE facilities and protests — with video showing strikes to the head and close-range shots that plaintiffs and journalists say violated guidance restricting aim at head/neck (examples include Reverend David Black and reporters) [1] [2] [3]. Reporting and lawsuits prompted a judge to temporarily limit some federal crowd-control tactics in Illinois after pepper-ball and tear-gas use at Broadview [4].
1. What pepper balls are and how agencies use them
Pepper balls are projectiles similar to paintballs that burst on impact and release a powdered irritant derived from capsaicin (often synthetic PAVA); they are fired from launchers similar to paintball guns and are classed among “less-lethal” crowd-control munitions that agencies have used to disperse protesters and defend vehicle movements at ICE facilities [5] [6] [7]. Local reporting documents repeated use at Broadview and other ICE sites, including rooftop firing and deployment from vehicles [6] [8].
2. Guidance, policy and reported contradictions
Federal use-of-force policies generally prohibit targeting a person’s head, neck, throat or spine with projectiles; investigative reporting and advocacy groups note those standards and say they have been skirted in practice, citing videos showing head strikes and close-range hits [3] [9]. A 2021 DHS Office of Inspector General note highlighted disparities across federal components — e.g., ICE’s policy treats certain 40mm launchers differently than CBP’s — which creates room for operational inconsistency [9].
3. Evidence of problematic deployments in Chicago and other cities
Multiple outlets documented instances where pepper balls hit journalists, clergy and bystanders. Video and eyewitness accounts show Reverend David Black struck multiple times while praying and reporters hit while clearly identified as press; Block Club Chicago and other local outlets reported staff injured by pepper balls and chemical irritants spreading into neighboring areas [1] [2] [10] [11]. Reports also describe pepper balls fired from rooftops and from moving vehicles at short distances [8] [9].
4. Health, environmental and operational concerns raised by experts and locals
Public-health and safety reporting warns that pepper ball powder and tear-gas particles can cause acute symptoms (tearing, vomiting, breathing difficulty) and may linger, with cold and wind changing dispersion and impact; local first responders reported being affected during Broadview operations [5]. Anecdotes include a reporter who vomited for hours after being hit and claims that residents and workers downwind experienced effects [12] [6].
5. Legal and judicial response so far
Litigation and complaints have followed the Broadview incidents. Plaintiffs including clergy, journalists and residents sued, and a judge in Illinois issued temporary restrictions on certain federal crowd-control measures after videos of pepper-ball strikes circulated widely [4]. The lawsuits allege violations of protesters’ First Amendment rights and press access; defendants (federal agencies) have sometimes disputed the context or claimed footage was incomplete [2] [4].
6. Competing narratives and institutional agendas
Reporting shows two competing frames: civil-society and press accounts describe indiscriminate or excessive use of pepper balls and chemical munitions against peaceful protesters and bystanders [1] [11], while federal statements and some officials emphasize lawful crowd-control and de-escalation tactics, framing uses as necessary to protect operations and facilitate vehicle movements (available sources do not mention a direct, detailed operational justification from DHS in these excerpts). Coverage also points out political overlay: the deployments occurred during a larger immigration enforcement campaign and drew partisan reactions, including supportive comments from some congressional Republicans [13] [10].
7. What the reporting does not firmly establish
Available sources document incidents, videos and lawsuits but do not provide a complete, published internal after-action or rulebook excerpt showing step-by-step ICE field protocols for pepper-ball use in these events; detailed chain-of-command authorizations, specific shot-by-shot rules for distance, or agency training materials are not included in the cited coverage (available sources do not mention full internal ICE protocol documents here). Independent oversight findings from the DHS OIG and court rulings are referenced, but a comprehensive public inventory of when and how ICE is authorized to use pepper balls in arrests versus crowd control is not provided in these pieces (available sources do not mention such a comprehensive inventory).
8. Takeaway and what to watch next
The reporting establishes a pattern: repeated pepper-ball use by federal agents at ICE sites, documented injuries and high-visibility video that spurred litigation and at least one judicial curtailment [1] [4]. Watch for court filings, DHS OIG updates, and any released ICE/CBP operational manuals or after-action reports that would document explicit protocols (available sources do not mention a released manual in these excerpts). Until then, journalists, legal observers and public-health experts remain primary sources documenting incidents and pressing for clarity and accountability [3] [11].