How Tear Gas Harms Children During Immigration Crackdowns

Federal immigration agents have harmed 79 children with tear gas and pepper spray since 2025, according to a ProPublica investigation. While the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) denies targeting children, the report found these chemicals affected youth in homes, cars, and on their way to school during immigration crackdown protests.

ProPublica identified these cases by reviewing news accounts, lawsuits, and officer-worn body camera footage, and by interviewing more than 40 victims and witnesses. The total of 79 children is nearly four times the number cited in a recent congressional report, though ProPublica suggests this may still be an undercount.

Why are these weapons more dangerous for children?

Chemical irritants are particularly toxic to children because they breathe more rapidly and inhale more contaminated air relative to their body weight than adults. Children also have narrower airways and are physically closer to the ground, where tear gas typically pools after deployment.

These substances, which include powder-based irritants and compounds from hot peppers, trigger nerve endings to create a burning sensation. According to the report, these weapons can sear the lungs and throat, causing vomiting, rashes, and coughs that last for weeks.

Did You Know? Tear gas is not a single substance but a catch-all term for various chemical irritants that can cause the throat and lungs to inflame, making it feel as if the victim is breathing through a straw.

How have courts responded to the use of chemical munitions?

Judges have repeatedly flagged the use of these weapons as excessive, though those rulings have faced challenges. In November 2025, a federal judge in Illinois ruled that ICE and CBP officers used chemicals “without justification, often without warning” against people who posed no physical threat.

In Portland, Oregon, a judge issued a temporary restraining order after a Jan. 31 rally where agents used Triple Chaser grenades, pepper ball projectiles, and “rubber ball grenades.” The order forbade chemical munitions unless they targeted someone posing “an imminent threat of physical harm.”

Despite these findings, appellate courts have since vacated the Illinois ruling and multiple rulings from Portland judges. This has left federal agents unfettered to continue using the weapons in areas not covered by specific injunctions.

Expert Insight: Samantha Carter notes that the vacation of lower court rulings highlights a significant gap in legal accountability. When appellate courts overturn injunctions, it potentially signals to federal agencies that the tactical utility of crowd control outweighs the specific civil rights concerns raised by regional judges.

Why is there no uniform standard for tear gas use?

Law enforcement policies vary by location because no federal standard exists. DHS policy states officers should “minimize the risk of unintended injury,” while CBP policy says officers “should not use” chemical munitions against “small children.” ICE policy considers the presence of bystanders when determining if force is reasonable.

ProPublica reporter talks about audio of children fueling immigration debate

Local policies often differ from these federal guidelines. Minneapolis forbids chemical munitions for crowd control unless the police chief authorizes it. In Portland, officers must consider proximity to homes before deploying gas.

The lack of containment is a primary concern. ProPublica found tear gas traveled at least a quarter mile in Minneapolis before entering a McDonald’s. In Broadview, Illinois, Derrick Nash reported that tear gas seeping into his home caused his children, ages 6 to 17, to cough and experience burning throats.

What may happen next?

U.S. lawmakers have begun demanding reforms following the ProPublica investigation. While bills to mandate stricter use-of-force training and target DHS weapon use have failed to reach a vote in Congress, new legislative efforts could be introduced.

Experts suggest that Congress may need to pass a bill mandating uniform federal practices and providing incentives for local police departments to adopt stricter standards. Such a move could potentially limit the unpredictability of chemical deployment in residential areas.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is responsible for the deployment of these chemicals?
Federal agents from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have deployed these irritants during immigration crackdown protests.

How does the DHS defend the use of these weapons?
The DHS states it does not target children and claims responsibility lies with “agitators” and parents who place children in harm’s way.

What specific weapons were used during the Portland rally?
Agents used Triple Chaser grenades, pepper ball projectiles, and “rubber ball grenades” that release stinging pellets, loud sounds, and bright lights.

Do you believe federal law enforcement should be subject to the same crowd-control restrictions as local police departments?