See the inspiring stories Come meet us Time to legalize weed?
Portland Protests

21 former security leaders: We oppose militarized DHS deployment in Portland

We write to provide a clarion call for what we must all value most: our citizens’ constitutional rights.

Michael Leiter, Matthew Olsen and 19 other former security leaders
Opinion contributors

As a bipartisan group of veterans and leaders of the homeland security enterprise, we join together in opposition to the manner of deployment of Department of Homeland Security law enforcement personnel to Portland, Oregon.

In recent days, we have watched with increasing outrage the images of DHS personnel in military-style uniforms striking and using tear gas against unarmed protesters and taking them into custody in unmarked vehicles.

While those who perpetrate crimes and acts of violence during protests should be arrested and prosecuted, the unilateral deployment of militarized DHS officers has served to undermine, rather than promote, public safety.

The administration’s interest in sending additional officers to Portland, and potentially to other cities, adds to the imperative of using federal officers with the utmost care.

DHS has broad legal authority to enforce federal laws. Even so, the department was never intended to serve as a general domestic security agency. Given the ongoing harm to the trust DHS has earned since its inception and the administration’s threat to expand the use of DHS personnel to other cities, we believe it is imperative to highlight several critical points:

►At all times, regardless of the difficulty of their task, Department of Homeland Security officials must zealously protect the constitutional rights of all with whom they come in contact. Leadership — in DHS and beyond — must give no quarter for those who do otherwise.

►Meticulous adherence to constitutional protections is critical in every role, but it is at its pinnacle when law enforcement officers engage the public. Any deprivation of liberty must conform with carefully delineated and strictly enforced policies, and must be fully consistent with federal law and constitutional standards.

►DHS law enforcement personnel carry a special additional burden: to provide a model of constitutional policing for the more than 17,000 local law enforcement agencies in the United States. In this regard, DHS law enforcement should, in our view, exceed the standards required of them. All federal components assigned to augment the DHS mission should be properly trained before being sent to the field.

►In performing its law enforcement mission, DHS should do so with maximum transparency, making clear their affiliation and providing the public with a clear means of identifying the federal agency if not the personnel involved.

In Portland, Oregon, in 2020.

Officer safety is of course a priority, but it cannot come at the expense of the transparency a democracy requires to ensure that citizens’ rights are not abused. Plain clothes and unmarked vehicles should be used in only limited capacities and clearly identified circumstances. Crowd control is not among those circumstances.

►Those on duty should wear appropriate uniforms that avoid confusion with military forces and other nongovernment actors adopting quasimilitary tactical garb. Uniforms that clearly identify federal personnel as police will reduce the risk of confusion between forces seeking to maintain order and nongovernment protesters.

DHS must be a partner

►At its core, DHS was created to partner with — not be in opposition to — state and local officials. The nature of our country requires deep, sustained trust and cooperation between federal officials and their counterparts outside of the federal government.

In this light, we urge DHS leadership — as well as state and local officials — to reexamine any federal mission that is not done with this partnership principle at the forefront.

Our federal system first looks to state and local governments to provide for public safety. Any federal intervention, by DHS or others, must recognize this well established and invaluable constitutional principle. In turn, we hope that state and local officials will work collaboratively with federal officials, especially in areas of uniquely federal concerns.

Politics, policing should not mix

►The use of any law enforcement for political purposes is inappropriate. To place a rhetorically charged political context around legitimate, but challenging, missions endangers those personnel performing their valid duties.

We implore federal and local leadership to closely coordinate and clearly explain the missions law enforcement officers are performing as well as why and how. This places the focus on leaders and their decisions, not officers on the ground or their units.

We write to provide a clarion call for what we must all value most: our citizens’ constitutional rights.

We know well that such rights will be honored and protected only through a federal, state and local homeland security partnership that must be similarly guarded and nurtured. Indiscriminate use of federal police can drive a wedge between key constituencies, undermine critical partnerships, and undermine our nation’s ability to protect against terrorist threats and criminal activity.

We believe that DHS must lead in this endeavor, and that periods of strife are when such leadership is needed most.

Michael Leiter, former director, National Counterterrorism Center; Matthew Olsen, former director, National Counterterrorism Center; Tom Ridge, former secretary of Homeland Security; Jane Harman, former member of Congress and former ranking member, House Homeland Security Committee; retired Adm. James Loy, former deputy secretary of DHS, former commandant, U.S. Coast Guard; retired Adm. Thad Allen, former commandant, U.S. Coast Guard; Kenneth Wainstein, former assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; David Heyman, former assistant secretary of Homeland Security for Policy; retired U.S. Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden, former Central Intelligence Agency director, former National Security Agency director; Cathy Lanier, former chief, Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia; P.J. Crowley, former assistant secretary of State for Public Affairs; Suzanne Spaulding, former undersecretary of Homeland Security for the National Protection and Programs Directorate; Jessica Stern, professor, Boston University Pardee School of Global Studies; Brian Michael Jenkins, former member, White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security; Richard Ben-Veniste, former member, National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States (9/11 Commission); Evan Wolff, former senior adviser, DHS; Gil Kerlikowske, former director of Customs and Border Protection, former chief of police, Seattle and Buffalo; Charles H. (“Chuck") Ramsey, former chief, Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, former chief of police, Philadelphia, former co-chair of the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing; Michael Nutter, former mayor, Philadelphia, former member, Homeland Security Advisory Council; Adrian Fenty, former mayor, District of Columbia; Anthony Williams, former mayor, District of Columbia.

Featured Weekly Ad