by Shaanth Nanguneri, Oregon Capital Chronicle
April 1, 2026
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield last fall announced a tip line for Oregonians to report on what he called “Federal Oversight and Accountability” with a key caveat: The information people give the Oregon Department of Justice may not always lead to formal investigations or legal action.
The form came amid a wave of concerns about excessive force by federal immigration agents, who in the past year in Oregon have shot people, smashed car windows, dragged people out of their vehicles, held individuals at gunpoint and conducted operations outside sensitive locations such as schools. Less than a month after the tip line’s announcement, the attorney general and three top local prosecutors in the Portland area vowed to investigate and pursue charges against federal agents should their conduct persist, though they have yet to publicly announce a criminal case.
“Identifying individual federal officers in potential cases will be challenging, but not impossible, and we are committed to doing the hard work required to keep our communities safe and protect the rights of the people in Oregon,” Rayfield told the Capital Chronicle in December. “Federal authority is not absolute.”
Now, newly released records detailing Oregonians’ submissions to the tip line suggest Rayfield is inching closer to that goal. The Oregon Department of Justice released around 20 separate reports to the Capital Chronicle in response to a public records request. Many of the entries detail concerns about federal officers indiscriminately deploying tear gas against protesters at the Portland Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility.
However, the agency also withheld six separate entries on the grounds of a public records exemption under Oregon law involving “investigatory information compiled for criminal law purposes,” according to David Pitcher, public records counsel for the agency. Those may not necessarily be part of six open, separate criminal investigations, said Jenny Hansson, an agency spokesperson. She said the records were compiled for “criminal law purposes” and could be “related to review before deciding whether to open a formal investigation.”
It’s unclear which exact incidents across Oregon Rayfield is looking into, because justice department officials withheld documentation and evidence submitted for each report. However, court records in Oregon’s case against Trump’s attempted deployment of the National Guard suggest that state attorneys are interested in a potential criminal investigation into activity near Portland’s ICE facility.
Asked about the exempted records, Rayfield said that “every report helps us build the case that federal agents must operate within the law, just like everyone else.”
“Oregonians are our eyes and ears,” he said in a statement, “and when they share what they’ve experienced or witnessed, it can make a real difference in our ability to hold the federal government accountable.”
Advocates question centrality of DAs in investigations
Key to the pursuit of any investigation or criminal charges against federal agents has been local district attorneys in the Portland area. Rayfield has called his potential pursuit of charges a “collaborative effort” and said that he will refer investigations to district attorneys for consideration for bringing criminal charges under Oregon law. Multnomah County District Attorney Nathan Vasquez, however, has publicly cast doubt on his ability to successfully prosecute cases.
In the past few months, meanwhile, pressure has been mounting for state leaders to pursue investigations and prosecutions against federal authorities.
In December, Free Speech for People, a Massachusetts-based left-leaning advocacy group, urged Oregon officials to pursue criminal cases against federal agents on the grounds that immunity “is not available in all circumstances and does not preclude criminal investigation.” The Oregon Department of Justice in mid-March also declined to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court for a homicide case against a federal Drug Enforcement Administration agent involving a fatal car crash. Legal experts say losing the case at the nation’s highest court could have made it harder to hold federal immigration agents accountable.
But the hurdles facing such prosecutions have led some advocates to question whether prosecutors are effectively avoiding a serious effort at bringing charges against federal agents. U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in October called efforts to arrest federal agents “illegal and futile.” Agency officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
Ben Horton, who serves as counsel for Free Speech for People, said his organization is “happy to see” the potential criminal inquiries, but that Oregon leaders could go further and prosecute more high-ranking federal officials. He pointed to federal officers outside the Portland ICE facility using tear gas and pushing back hundreds of protesters down the street hours after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order in October barring the National Guard’s deployment to Portland.
“That wasn’t a random act of a few line officers. That was ordered, that was planned, that was prepared, and it was clearly unlawful,” he said. “So I think we’re really interested in seeing them go up the ladder, especially in instances like that, where it is not just one officer who, you know, is doing something unlawful, it’s a sort of whole organizational issue.”
Federal agents, however, have significant criminal immunity for conduct within the scope of their duties under an 1890 U.S. Supreme Court precedent involving the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause. Over the past few decades, federal courts have rarely allowed state-led prosecutions of federal agents. Federal officers have often successfully petitioned to remove cases from state to federal court where they have obtained immunity.
But Horton said that shift to federal court would mean Rayfield, not a local district attorney, would be responsible for arguing the case. The legal dynamics raise the question of why Rayfield is going through a local district attorney to consider prosecutions, he said.
“Very soon after handing the case to the DA, you would have the case handed back to him. Quite frankly, I’m not sure what to make of that,” he said. “That does…raise that concern of this being sort of playing political hot potato, and handing this off and then not doing anything.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Oregon Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oregon Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Julia Shumway for questions: [email protected].