The situation has calmed outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility on South Macadam Avenue in recent months, in stark contrast to the scene for much of the past year.
Federal officers’ aggressive crowd control tactics placed tenants at a nearby low-income apartment complex in the crossfire, according to two lawsuits. Clouds of toxic chemicals seeped into residents’ homes when Department of Homeland Security officers frequently tear gassed ICE protesters in close proximity to the apartment complex, called Gray’s Landing.
Both lawsuits seek to limit federal officers’ use of chemical weapons. The ACLU filed one lawsuit focused on protecting protesters and journalists, while REACH Community Development — which owns Gray’s Landing — alongside residents, are plaintiffs in the other suit.
RELATED NEWS
What to do if you spot ICE in your community
Legal proceedings continue, with two orders made by federal judges in Oregon limiting tear gas usage now on hold, leaving residents in a state of limbo.
The two cases challenge the excessive usage of tear-gas from different angles, but the final decision for both will set an important precedent for residents, protesters, journalists and bystanders alike regarding what rights individuals are afforded in the midst of law enforcement activity.
What will be made of the unprecedented cases is still up in the air, but prior cases may provide insight into what could become of the residents’ fate.
The debate over residents’ civil liberties continues
The appellate judges heard oral arguments on each case’s merit July 10. Two of the three judges, both appointed by President Donald Trump, appeared skeptical of the presented arguments.
While residents contended tear gas routinely entering their homes violated their civil liberties, U.S. Department of Justice attorneys argued federal officers are protected from any “incidental” impacts to bystanders caused by crowd-control measures.
DOJ lawyer Brenna Scully also argued that REACH and the tenants were trying to invent a new constitutional right to be free from “consensual exposure to wafting airborne contaminants.”
Attorneys for the tenants argued no precedent for such a situation exists to draw legal decisions from because no prior litigation has focused on the government repeatedly releasing chemical munitions next to a residential building over an extended period of time.
A state of uncertainty
As the court deliberates, residents of Gray’s Landing are left awaiting their fate.
Some remain on edge, still vividly remembering what life was like mere months ago.
Lashawnda Shavers is a former resident of Gray’s Landing. She lived in a unit on the south side of the building, facing the street the facility is on.
“I had to sleep with my gas mask,” Shavers said. “I already have sleep apnea, lung condition, only 65% lung capacity, and I needed air. I don’t want to not wake up.”
Dr. Afif El-Hasan from the American Lung Association has many concerns about the health effects of these chemicals for the residents of Gray’s Landing.
“Like any other irritant or any other chemical that causes a chronic inflammation in the body, you’re going to expect that if there’s prolonged use of it, that it is going to cause chronic problems with upper airway irritation, increased susceptibility to upper airway infections, and to worsening upper airway infections and possibly long term damage to the lungs as well,” El-Hasan told Street Roots.
Tear gas is banned in warfare under the Chemical Weapons Convention, but U.S. law enforcement have been deploying it on civilians as a method of crowd control for over a century.
While research on the long-term effects of tear gas exposure is harder to find, immediate symptoms from exposure, including burning in the eyes, excessive tearing, blurred vision, chest tightness, shortness of breath and skin irritation, are well documented.
Josiah Burks, 18, is another resident in the building. His unit is on the southeast corner.
He first experienced being tear-gassed in his own home at 13 years old during protests in 2020.
Now, Burks recognizes the sound of a tear gas canister setting off as his cue to close the windows. Even with precautions, it doesn’t stop the gas from entering.
“The eyes burn, the cough, the hard breathing, and like, just like the literal tears,” Burks said.
Burks often goes into the bathroom or his dad’s room to wait for the chemicals to filter out, usually taking around 10 to 15 minutes.
But the issues go beyond a painful 15 minutes.
“I feel like the worst thing was I do track, I do football,” Burks said. “So as an athlete, when you’re exposed to those things, and you have practice two hours later, now my lungs are gonna be burning, and so I’m done with the entire day.”
While the situation is dangerous for all residents, El-Hasan is especially concerned about the health of children.
There are not many long-term studies on children experiencing exposure to tear gas, so El-Hasan compared the situation to studies done on long-term exposure to air pollution for children. From these, we know that it will lead to decreased overall lung function when they become adults, El-Hasan said.
“So if there’s a chemical in the air that’s specifically designed to irritate the upper airways, I’m going to assume that it’s going to cause even a low level of chronic irritation or inflammation, and that may not only make the child more susceptible to asthma or more susceptible to upper airway problems, but may possibly affect their long-term growth and development of the lungs.” El-Hasan said.
Mindan Ocon lives with her four-year-old daughter on the southwest corner of Gray’s Landing, diagonal from the facility.
Ocon remembered the scene on Jan. 31 outside of her building when things turned chaotic in a matter of seconds. At her daughter’s request, she let her take a peek at the protest that had marched to the front of the facility.
“So I got her out there, and I explained to her, ‘Hey, might be any second that they’re gonna come out,’” Ocon said. “And as I’m literally trying to set up my camera, I look over at the corner of my eye, and I see them come out, and I just saw a cloud of smoke, and I was like, ‘Go, go go.’”
She told Street Roots about the lingering effects the federal response has left on her daughter.
On a recent trip to visit family, she noticed her daughter flinching when she would turn on the pump to blow up their air mattress. Ocon believes her daughter’s reaction to the sound came as a result of frequently hearing flash grenades and chemical munitions being deployed.
Beyond the direct health effects from chemicals, the impact of trauma on health is also a concerning factor to El-Hasan.
In his practice as a pediatrician, El-Hasan regularly examines patients for adverse childhood experiences.
“They’ve actually found there’s a higher correlation for increased risk of chronic conditions like heart disease or depression or diabetes or substance abuse disorder later in life for children who are in situations of high stress, especially when they’re little,” El-Hasan said.
The environment children are in impacts more than just physical health. The stress they go through can alter their brain development, as well as impact their psychiatric and mental health in general, El-Hasan said.
The immunity loophole
While it’s true there has been no such legal case, there are some that hold insight into the legality of the situation. Some present hope for residents, while others reveal a trend of immunity laws used to prevent accountability for government officials.
The Flint, Michigan water crisis is one situation. Initially, immunity laws seemed to place the residents at an unfair disadvantage.
Following the crisis, large law firms were hesitant to participate in cases, largely because of the doctrines of sovereign immunity which protects states from lawsuits and official immunity which shields top government officials from personal liability.
Yet Flint residents’ unwillingness to back down eventually paid off.
In 2020, two of the lawsuits made it to the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court where the Court rejected city official’s attempts to claim immunity.
The courts affirmed citizens’ rights to remedy, stating that the officials’ decision to switch water sources in 2014 harmed the citizens’ Constitutional right to “bodily integrity.”
City officials petitioned for the question of immunity to be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States, but were rejected in January 2020.
In 2021, Federal District Court Judge Judith E. Levy ordered a $626 million settlement to be paid to Flint residents.
But just as some cases provide merit to the residents’ case, the concept of immunity could likewise paint a grim outcome for Gray’s Landing residents.
Many of these instances stem from qualified immunity. Under this framework, officials are broadly protected from prosecution or lawsuits.
One such case where qualified immunity was used is West v. Winfield.
In 2014, Shaniz West came home to find her house surrounded by police officers who told her they were looking for her ex-boyfriend.
West offered her keys to the officers and said she doubted he was there.
That didn’t stop Idaho police or the SWAT team from destroying her possessions and home with tear-gas grenades. After officers made it inside, they found no ex-boyfriend — just West’s dog.
West moved to challenge this, but ultimately her case was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on the basis of “No Supreme Court or Ninth Circuit case clearly established, as of August 2014, that Defendants exceeded the scope of consent.”
In other words, because there had not been a pre-established case indicating a homeowner giving consent to enter their home and still being met with police barraging their way in is acting out of the scope of authority, then there was nothing to be done.
West was given $900 and a hotel room for three weeks provided by the city.
While qualified immunity is certainly powerful, it may not always be as such.
So far four states — Colorado, Montana, Nevada, and New Mexico — have banned qualified immunity as a defense against police officers in state court.
On Aug. 8, 2025, U.S. Representative Shri Thanedar (D-Michigan) introduced the Ending Qualified Immunity for ICE Agents Act to Congress but it has since remained in the initial legislative stage.
And as seen with Flint, Michigan, immunity laws don’t always grant government officials complete immunity.
Suing is not enough
Even with the ongoing lawsuit, some residents are still dissatisfied with REACH’s response.
It should be noted that management at REACH recently changed, but even so, some residents want more to be done moving forward.
Shavers told Street Roots that she felt management did not do enough to ensure residents’ safety beyond giving them an air purifier.
In one email to REACH, she demanded an evacuation plan. They directed her to flyers informing residents to prepare by getting water, food, prescriptions and taking earplugs that were available. It also told residents to call 911 if they experience an emergency.
But the problem was that Shavers had called 911 in October. They responded stating they would not come into the area as it was marked as an “exclusionary zone,” Shavers said.
“You know that public emergency response will not enter this building or the area if it’s contaminated,” Shavers said. “So it’s your absolute responsibility to make sure we’re protected.”
Her other main concerns were not being informed of the air ventilation being cleaned, a lack of proper interior cleaning and minimal resources provided to prevent the tear gas from getting in.
In an email to Street Roots, REACH listed steps taken regarding air ventilation units including air mitigation services conducted from June to August 2025 and follow-up work being completed in December.
REACH also noted the installation of charcoal filters in the HVAC system in June 2025 and the procurement and installation of commercial-grade air filters in October 2025.
They did not provide any information regarding interior cleaning.
To best protect residents’ health in situations like these, taking steps such as having good sealants on doors and windows, thoroughly cleaning interior surfaces and deep cleaning the carpets could go a long way towards protecting the residents’ health, El-Hasan said.
It’s uncertain where the residents’ lawsuit will go, but El-Hasan hopes that the well-being of residents is shared by all.
He believes any government agency should help the residents in an area when there’s any kind of activity that may affect the air quality there. Educating them on how they can best protect their lungs and homes is an ideal model to follow.