Federal immigration officers shoot and wound 2 people in Portland, Oregon, authorities say
Portland (AP): Federal immigration officers shot and wounded two people in a vehicle outside a hospital in Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, a day after an officer shot and killed a driver in Minnesota, authorities said.
The Department of Homeland Security described the vehicle's passenger as “a Venezuelan illegal alien affiliated with the transnational Tren de Aragua prostitution ring” who had been involved in a recent shooting in Portland.
When agents identified themselves to the occupants during a “targeted vehicle stop” Thursday afternoon, the driver tried to run them over, the department said in a written statement.
“Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired a defensive shot,” the statement said. “The driver drove off with the passenger, fleeing the scene.”
There was no immediate independent corroboration of that account or of any gang affiliation of the vehicle's occupants. During prior shootings involving agents involved in President Donald Trump's surge of immigration enforcement in US cities, including Wednesday's shooting by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis, video evidence cast doubt on the administration's descriptions of what prompted the shootings.
Trump and his allies have consistently blamed Tren de Aragua for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some US cities.
The shooting escalates tensions in an city that has long had a contentious relationship with President Donald Trump, including Trump's recent, failed effort to deploy National Guard troops in the city.
Trump's decision to send militarised personnel into US cities to conduct immigration enforcement drew long-running nightly protests outside the ICE building in Portland.
According to the the Portland Police bureau, officers initially responded to a report of a shooting outside Adventist Health hospital at about 2:18 pm Thursday.
A few minutes later, police received information that a man who had been shot was asking for help in a residential area a couple of miles away. Officers then responded there and found a man and a woman with gunshot wounds. Officers determined they were injured in the shooting with federal agents, police said.
Their conditions were not immediately known. Portland police said officers applied a tourniquet to one of the wounded. Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney said during a Portland city council meeting that "as far as we know both of these individuals are still alive and we are hoping for more positive updates throughout the afternoon.”
At a news conference Thursday night, Portland Police Chief Bob Day said the FBI was leading the investigation and that he had no details about the events that led to the shooting.
Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and the city council called on US Immigration and Customs Enforcement to end all operations in Oregon's largest city until a full investigation is completed.
“We stand united as elected officials in saying that we cannot sit by while constitutional protections erode and bloodshed mounts,” a joint statement said. “Portland is not a training ground' for militarized agents, and the full force' threatened by the administration has deadly consequences.”
Wilson also suggested at a news conference that he didn't necessarily believe the federal government's account of the shooting: “There was a time we could take them at their word. That time is long past.”
Democratic State Sen. Kayse Jama, who lives near the shooting scene, said Oregon is a welcoming state — but he told federal agents to leave.
“You are not welcome,” Jama said. "You need to get the hell out of Oregon.”
The city officials said “federal militarization undermines effective, community-based public safety, and it runs counter to the values that define our region. We'll use every legal and legislative tool available to protect our residents' civil and human rights.”
They urged residents to show up with “calm and purpose during this difficult time.”
“We respond with clarity, unity, and a commitment to justice,” the statement said. “We must stand together to protect Portland.”
US Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, urged any protesters to remain peaceful.
“Trump wants to generate riots,” he said in a post on the X social media platform. “Don't take the bait.”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ballari violence: Were cops made scapegoats to cover political failure?
Bengaluru: Across Karnataka, a serious discussion has begun after the violence in Ballari and the swift action taken against police officers who were on the ground that day. The core question being asked is simple: when law and order fails, why are police officers the first to be shown the door, while political responsibility is quietly pushed aside?
The January 1 clash in Ballari was not a sudden street fight. It was a political confrontation involving supporters of two sitting MLAs. A banner related to the unveiling of a Valmiki statue became the flashpoint. What followed was stone-pelting, firing, and the death of a Congress worker. The situation spiralled within hours.
Within a day, Ballari SP Pavan Nejjur was suspended. Soon after, senior officers were reshuffled. Deputy Inspector General of Police Vartika Katiyar was transferred. No official reason was cited in the notification. But the timing made one thing clear: accountability, at least on paper, had been fixed.
Since then, there has been unease within police circles and political debate outside it.
Unconfirmed reports that Nejjur attempted suicide after his suspension were firmly denied by senior officers and the home minister. They said he was safe, resting, and under stress. Still, the very fact that such reports gained traction says something about the pressure officers feel when action is taken overnight, without public clarity.
Opposition leaders have called Nejjur a scapegoat, pointing out that he had taken charge only hours before the violence. They have asked how an officer can be blamed for a political clash he barely had time to assess. They have also drawn parallels with earlier incidents where police leadership was suspended after tragedies, while political decision-making remained untouched.
However, responding to this criticism, Home Minister G Parameshwara rejected the argument that the suspension was unfair because Nejjur had assumed charge only hours earlier. “It is not important whether he reported to duty on the same day (of incident) or one hour back. Duty is duty. He is not new to the department. IPS officers are trained to handle such situations any time. If he had acted swiftly and promptly, he could have prevented the situation from escalating.” He had said adding that Nejjur did not discharge his duties properly and that this was the reason for his suspension.
Now, fresh and unconfirmed reports suggest that Vartika Katiyar may have met a senior cabinet minister, questioning why she was made to pay the price for a situation that was political in nature. There is no official confirmation of this meeting. But the talk itself has added fuel to the debate.
What is being discussed in the state is not whether the police made mistakes. Many acknowledge that the situation on January 1 was mishandled. A clash earlier in the day was allowed to cool down without strong preventive action. Later, a banner came up near a politically sensitive location. The crowd should not have been allowed to build up. Better anticipation was needed.
At the same time, critics are asking whether the entire burden can be placed on officers when the trigger itself was political rivalry. Who installed the banner? Who mobilised supporters? Who had armed private gunmen present at the spot? These are questions that are still part of the investigation, yet administrative punishment moved faster than political accountability.
This has led to a wider comparison with past incidents, including the Bengaluru stampede after the RCB victory celebrations. There too, police officers were suspended after lives were lost, while decisions taken at higher levels were defended as unavoidable. Many are now saying Ballari fits into the same pattern.
The argument being made is not that the police are blameless. The argument is that responsibility appears to stop at the uniform. When things go wrong, officers are transferred or suspended to send a message. But when the violence is rooted in political rivalry, that message feels incomplete.
Within police ranks, there is also quiet concern about working conditions. Officers say they are expected to manage volatile political situations overnight, often with little room to push back against powerful interests. When things hold, they are invisible. When they collapse, they stand alone.
The Ballari episode has once again exposed this fault line.
For the government, the challenge is larger than one suspension or transfer. The real test is whether it is willing to publicly acknowledge political failures when law and order breaks down, instead of letting the system suggest that the police alone dropped the ball.
For now, what remains is a growing feeling across Karnataka that accountability is selective. And that whenever politics turns violent, the easiest answer is to change the officers, not the decisions that led to the violence in the first place.
