What can local government leaders do to protect their residents in a time of federal authoritarianism? Many Portlanders have asked that question since federal officials and agents have become increasingly hostile to immigrants or those they perceive to be immigrants, as well as people protesting President Trump’s draconian immigration crackdown. 

Recent actions by federal officers in Portland have left the city shaken and prompted calls for more severe consequences for the federal officials inflicting harm on residents. Portlanders were rattled by the Customs and Border Patrol shooting that injured two people in East Portland early last month. After federal agents deployed large quantities of tear gas on peaceful protesters, including children and elderly people, last weekend, calls for action have grown stronger. 

A growing number of advocates are now turning their attention toward Multnomah County District Attorney Nathan Vasquez—the elected official tasked with prosecuting those who break local laws. 

In a February 5 letter, dozens of Oregon labor unions called on Vasquez and Portland Mayor Keith Wilson to take “immediate action in response to the violent federal crackdown” on last weekend’s union-led protest outside the ICE facility. For Wilson, this would mean holding the facility’s landlord to account for violating newly enacted city codes targeting detention centers. Meanwhile, they demanded Vasquez begin investigating and prosecuting federal officers for their potentially illegal conduct in Portland. 

“The incident on Saturday shows that ICE has no discipline and no common sense,” Portland Association of Teachers President Angela Bonilla said in a statement released with the letter. Bonilla was referring to the union-led rally and march on January 31 that left thousands of people caught off-guard by tear gas. “We need to see an end to the obviously illegal actions of ICE and full prosecution of ICE agents who terrorize our city and our neighbors.” 

Others, including Portland City Councilor Angelita Morillo, have also recently asked Vasquez to take action against federal officers who exceed their authority. 

Around the country, local and state prosecutors are taking strong positions against the Trump administration, which appears unwilling to investigate most incidents of excessive force by federal law enforcement. While such attempts to prosecute federal officials would likely face immense pushback from the current administration, advocates believe it’s still worth trying. Vasquez, for his part, appears skeptical. 

Nathan Vasquez v. Federal Overreach

Vasquez has never claimed to be an ICE agent watchdog. He has, however, identified as a “tough on crime” prosecutor. In a statement to the Mercury, Vasquez said he “abhors political violence,” dedicating a good portion of his career to “aggressively prosecuting anyone engaged in it, regardless of their political affiliation.” Will that ethos extend to the actions of federal agents? 

Vasquez was elected in May 2024 on a "law and order" platform, beating former DA Mike Schmidt—a progressive who was accused of being weak on crime. Vasquez began his term at the beginning of 2025, just before Trump took office. While other local electeds have frequently sounded off against the federal administration in recent months, Vasquez has largely stayed on the sidelines. 

That’s not to say he’s been silent. In November, Vasquez signed onto a statement with Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and two other Portland-area district attorneys, demanding the US Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security “immediately halt unlawful and reckless actions by federal officers operating in Oregon.” 

At the time, Vasquez said he was taking a stand against “gratuitous force” across all levels of law enforcement. Even so, he didn’t commit to charging federal officers if they broke the law, citing his belief that it was unlikely for a criminal investigation against a federal officer for on-duty conduct to lead to probable cause. 

In a February 4 statement to the Mercury, Vasquez again committed to “reviewing any investigations submitted to us by the AG, or any other law enforcement agency, for prosecution.” But he said the Multnomah County DA’s (MCDA) office is “not an investigative agency,” and they are “not actively working investigations” with the AG’s office or any other agency. Vasquez said while the MCDA does have an investigations division, its staffers are expected to work on existing, open cases. 

“Originating new criminal investigations is not a part of their job, nor something that they have the resources to do without abandoning the work we rely on them to do every day,” Vasquez said. “AG Rayfield has said his office is investigating these situations and I have great confidence in his investigative team.” 

It’s true that Rayfield has proven ambitious in his role leading Oregon’s Department of Justice. In addition to leading or joining more than 50 lawsuits against the Trump administration, his office has come out strongly against federal agents using excessive force by encouraging witnesses to submit evidence to the state DOJ, which has a specific form for reporting concerns about federal actions. Critics say even with someone as capable as Rayfield at the helm, however, the MCDA still has an important role to play. 

“DAs are in a crucial position,” Schmidt, Vasquez’s predecessor, told the Mercury. “In fact, they may be one of the last lines of defense in our communities for being able to hold federal officers accountable.”

Schmidt pointed to a newly-formed national network of prosecutors, called Fight Against Federal Overreach. (Abbreviated, that’s FAFO, which has another meaning, too.) FAFO was organized as a way for prosecutors to “compare strategies, coordinate action, support each other, and confront federal overreach wherever it occurs.” Members include Minneapolis DA Mary Moriarty and Philadelphia DA Steve Krasner, as well as prosecutors from Austin, Dallas, and several more jurisdictions around the country. 

“The very first thing that any DA could do is tap into the national network of prosecutors who are standing up bravely and saying ‘This isn’t going to happen in my community,’” Schmidt said. 

Vasquez, meanwhile, appeared somewhat skeptical of the DA network. 

“I am in contact with other district attorneys from across the country,” Vasquez said. “We are unaware of a single case that has actually been filed against a federal agent for on duty conduct by the DAs who are publicly stating that they will charge federal agents.”

Schmidt has other suggestions, too. He said the MCDA could set up an evidence-gathering portal like Rayfield’s, and ask people to share evidence in an anonymous, protected way. But Schmidt said the role of the DA extends beyond merely the job of a prosecutor. 

“Local DAs are lawyers; they can be community leaders who talk to people about First Amendment rights so they’re absolutely, 100 percent clear on what the law is,” Schmidt said. “They can make it clear to federal law enforcement that when they commit crimes, they’re not above state law and they will be investigated and held accountable.” 

While strong messaging may not seem like enough to push back federal overreach, it is certainly a tool some prosecutors have tapped into. Krasner, the Philadelphia DA, recently made headlines for his vows to hunt down federal agents “the way they hunted down Nazis for decades” in order to achieve justice. 

Schmidt believes strong rhetoric could work to discourage federal agents from breaking the law. 

“While deterrence doesn’t work for every population that may be committing crimes, it would absolutely work if it was meaningfully said to federal law enforcement,” he said. “When I see district attorneys across the country standing up at press conferences and telling the federal agencies they will be held accountable, that can absolutely, in and of itself, lead to more public safety.” 

Other legal experts agree. In a recent New York Times opinion piece, legal scholars Barry Friedman and Stephen I. Vladeck called on local and state prosecutors to bring charges against federal officials when they break state laws. The approach, Friedman and Vladeck wrote, “may be the only path to accountability” for the officers who killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, as well as others who have committed other, non-lethal violations elsewhere. 

“Prosecutors should be gathering and securing evidence and seriously considering filing charges — sooner rather than later,” the New York Times piece states. “Not every prosecution will succeed, and all will face obstacles that are built into our legal system. But critically, bringing these state and local prosecutions could produce deterrent effects that are so desperately needed now.” 

Vasquez seems to hold different beliefs about how to deter federal officers from over-the-top responses to anti-ICE protests. In his statements to the Mercury, he called out “agitators on the political extremes” who “seek to co-opt demonstrations to generate [a] response from the federal government.” 

“I believe that Washington is looking for a fight and will rise to every occasion to meet civil disorder in progressive communities with force,” Vasquez said, adding that his office “receives complaints from left- and right-wing livestreamers and demonstrators who are engaged in a back-and-forth of who can provoke whom to physical action and then asking police and prosecutors to get the other guy.” 

“This is a distraction from the serious issues that exist in our community and nation and I would urge everyone: do not rise to the bait, you will give the extremists precisely what they are looking for, attention and a purported justification to escalate.” 

Schmidt and others who believe DAs should be at the forefront of pushback to the Trump administration believe the dangerous, and sometimes lethal, actions of federal agents in American cities are the top public safety concern of the moment. 

“At the end of the day, a DA’s role is to do everything they can with their authority in office to protect communities and keep the community safe,” Schmidt said. “What we are seeing with the federal administration and immigration enforcement is making our communities live in fear, and actually less safe. It’s hard to think of a bigger issue in Portland right now.”