June, 23 2020, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
AIUSA media office,Email:,media@aiusa.org,Phone: 202-544-0200 x302
Amnesty International Documents Widespread Police Violence Against Protesters for Black Lives
Interactive map displays 125 incidents in 40 states where the police used force on peaceful protesters, journalists and bystanders
WASHINGTON
Police across the U.S. committed widespread and egregious human rights violations against people protesting the unlawful killings of Black people and calling for police reform, Amnesty International said today, as it launched an interactive map of incidents of police violence and a new campaign calling for systemic changes in policing.
Amnesty International has documented 125 separate examples of police violence against protesters in 40 states and the District of Columbia between 26 May and 5 June 2020, a period when hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. and around the world protested against racism and police violence and to demand that Black lives matter. The analysis shows that law enforcement consistently violated human rights out on the streets instead of fulfilling their obligations to respect and facilitate the right of people to peacefully protest.
This unlawful use of force included beatings, misuse of tear gas and pepper spray, and the inappropriate firing of less-lethal projectiles, such as sponge rounds and rubber bullets. They were committed by a range of police officers across federal agencies, state and local police departments, as well as military forces.
"The analysis is clear: when activists and supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement took to the streets in cities and towns across the country to peacefully demand an end to systemic racism and police violence, they were overwhelmingly met with a militarized response and more police violence," said Brian Castner, Senior Crisis Adviser on Arms and Military Operations at Amnesty International.
"The time for applying band-aids and making excuses for a few 'bad apples' has passed. What's needed now is systemic, root-and-branch reform of policing that brings an end to the scourge of police use of excessive force and extrajudicial executions of Black people. Communities should not live in fear of being harmed by the very officers that have sworn an oath to protect them. Officers responsible for excessive force and unlawful killings must always be held accountable."
Open-source investigation into U.S. protests
To evaluate these incidents, Amnesty International's Crisis Evidence Lab gathered almost 500 videos and photographs of protests from social media platforms. This digital content was then verified, geolocated, and analyzed by investigators with expertise in weapons, police tactics, and international and U.S. laws governing the use of force. In some cases, researchers were also able to interview victims and confirm police conduct with local police departments.
Police violence in dozens of states
As the map shows, Amnesty International's analysis reveals a dizzying array of violations by law enforcement across the country, including in 80% of states.
"Giving law enforcement weapons of war creates an endless cycle of violence that disproportionately affects Black people. We are a society that has chosen to let law enforcement kill Black people in near-total impunity and attack protesters who peacefully exercised their right to speak up against these human rights abuses," said Ernest Coverson, End Gun Violence Campaign Manager for Amnesty International USA.
"This research shows that the police will stop at nothing to squash protesters. No one had to lose their eyesight, get sick, or forever fear the police because they wanted to say that Black lives matter. It's time to end these human rights violations once and for all."
On May 30, a joint patrol of Minneapolis police and Minnesota National Guard personnel unlawfully shot U.S.-manufactured 37/40mm impact projectiles at people peacefully standing on the front porches of their homes. After encountering the people recording with their smartphones, the forces ordered them to "get inside" and then yelled "light them up" before firing.
On June 1, security personnel from a variety of federal agencies, including National Park Police and the Bureau of Prisons, as well as D.C. National Guard personnel, committed a range of human rights violations against protesters in Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C. They misused a variety of crowd control agents, and tossed U.S.-manufactured Stinger Ball grenades, which contain pepper spray and explode in a concussive "flash-bang" effect, throwing rubber pellets indiscriminately in all directions. The attack, which preceded a photo op by President Trump in front of a nearby church, was widely reported on by the media, including a lengthy video report by The Washington Post for which Amnesty International contributed the weapons and tactical analysis.
Also on June 1, in Philadelphia, state and city police used large amounts of tear gas and pepper spray to remove dozens of peaceful protesters from the Vine Street Expressway. One affected protester, Lizzie Horne, a Rabbinical student, told Amnesty International:
"Out of the blue, they started breezing pepper spray into the crowd. There was one officer on the median who was spraying as well. Then they started with tear gas. Someone who was right in the front - who had a tear gas canister hit his head - started running back. And we were trying to help him, flushing his eyes and then he just fainted and started having a seizure. He came to pretty quickly. As we were finally lifting him up and started getting him out of the way, they started launching more tear gas; that's when people started to get really scared. They started gassing in a kettle formation - we were against a big fence that people had to jump over, up a steep hill. The fence was maybe six feet tall. People started putting their hands up - but the cops wouldn't let up. It was can after can after can. We were encapsulated in gas. We were drooling and coughing uncontrollably.
"Then the cops came from the other side of the fence and started gassing from that direction. After that, the police started coming up the hill and... they were hitting and tackling people. They were dragging people down the hill and forcing them down on their knees, lining them up kneeling on the median on the highway with their hands in zip ties, and pulling down their masks and spraying and gassing them again."
The violations were not limited to the largest cities. Local police inappropriately used tear gas against peaceful protesters in Louisville, Kentucky; Murfreesboro, Tennessee; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; and Albuquerque, New Mexico. And in Fort Wayne, Indiana on May 30, a local journalist lost his eye when police shot him in the face with a tear gas grenade.
Legal analysis on use of force
Excessive use of force against peaceful protesters violates both the U.S. Constitution and international human rights law. Law enforcement agencies at all levels have a responsibility to respect, protect, and facilitate peaceful assemblies. While the majority of the protesters have been peaceful, police have routinely used disproportionate and indiscriminate force against entire demonstrations.
Police can only resort to use of force at public assemblies when it is absolutely necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate law enforcement objective, in response to serious violence threatening the lives or rights of others. Even then, authorities must strictly distinguish between peaceful demonstrators or bystanders, and any individual who is actively engaged in violence. The violent acts of an individual never justify the disproportionate use of force against peaceful protesters generally, and force is only justified until the immediate threat of violence toward others is contained.
Any restrictions of public assemblies - including use of force against demonstrators - must not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, political ideology, or other social groups.
Police reform urgently needed
In an Executive Order on June 16, President Trump called for limited police reforms, including a partial ban on chokeholds of the kind that killed George Floyd in Minneapolis last month, as well as a national database on allegations of excessive force by police. Some state and city law enforcement have also rolled out partial reforms locally since the protests began, such as suspending the use of some crowd control weapons like tear gas. In Minneapolis, a majority of the City Council pledged to disband the police department.
Amnesty International USA and the seven million-strong Amnesty International movement worldwide are demanding real and lasting reforms to policing across the board, including to:
- Stop extrajudicial executions of Black people by police and bring accountability for their deaths through independent, impartial investigations that lead to reparations for the victims and survivors.
- Pass federal legislation, like the PEACE Act, to restrict police use of force to only what is strictly necessary and proportionate in order to limit the use of deadly force.
- Pass federal legislation to demilitarize the police by eliminating the 1033 program.
- Ban the use of chokeholds and other maneuvers that cut off blood and oxygen to the brain, including neck holds, chokeholds, and similar excessive force. Such use force should be considered a federal civil rights violation.
- Prohibit the use of no knock warrants, particularly for drug searches.
- Change the intent standard requirement from "willfulness" to "recklessness," permitting prosecutors to successfully hold law enforcement accountable for depriving people of their civil rights and civil liberties.
- End the qualified immunity doctrine, which prevents police from being legally held accountable when they break the law.
- Ensure the right to peaceful protest against police violence, without the threat of protesters, journalists or bystanders being targeted by further police violence.
"Real, systemic and lasting police reform is needed at all levels to ensure that people across the country feel safe to walk the streets and express their opinions freely and peacefully without facing a real threat of harm from the very officers that are supposed to protect them. This is a Constitutional right that is mirrored in international human rights law; to deny this right with physical violence, tear gas and pepper spray is a hallmark of repression," said Brian Griffey, USA Researcher/Adviser at Amnesty International.
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400LATEST NEWS
Mike Johnson Touts $901 Billion Military Budget Plan After Gutting Medicaid, SNAP
"At such a time, bipartisan agreement to provide additional funds to the Pentagon would deliver a cruel message to the American public," advocacy groups warned.
Dec 08, 2025
Republican congressional leaders unveiled a sprawling military policy bill late Sunday that would authorize $901 billion in US military spending for the coming fiscal year, just months after GOP lawmakers and President Donald Trump pushed through the largest-ever cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who aggressively pushed cuts to Medicaid by peddling false claims of large-scale fraud, touted the 3,086-page National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) as legislation that would "ensure our military forces remain the most lethal in the world."
The bill, a compromise between House and Senate versions of the annual legislation, would authorize $8 billion more in US military spending than Trump asked for in his 2026 budget request.
If passed, the 2026 NDAA would pump billions of dollars more into the Pentagon, a cesspool of the kinds of waste, fraud, and abuse that Johnson and other Republicans claim to be targeting when they cut safety net programs, stripping health insurance and food aid from millions. The Pentagon has never passed an independent audit and continues to have "significant fraud exposure," the Government Accountability Office said earlier this year.
"The surge in Pentagon spending stands in sharp contrast to the drastic cuts in healthcare and food assistance programs imposed by the reconciliation package."
Final passage of the NDAA would push total military spending authorized by Congress this year above $1 trillion, including the $150 billion in Pentagon funds included in the Trump-GOP budget law enacted over the summer.
Last month, as Common Dreams reported, a coalition of watchdog and anti-war groups implored Congress not to approve any funding above the originally requested $892.6 billion, warning that additional money for the Pentagon would enable the Trump administration's lawless use of the military in US streets and overseas.
The groups also noted that "the surge in Pentagon spending stands in sharp contrast to the drastic cuts in healthcare and food assistance programs imposed by the reconciliation package."
"At such a time," they wrote in a letter to lawmakers, "bipartisan agreement to provide additional funds to the Pentagon would deliver a cruel message to the American public, one out of step with Democratic messaging over healthcare, reconciliation, and the shutdown."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billionaire Palantir Co-Founder Pushes Return of Public Hangings as Part of 'Masculine Leadership' Initiative
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," said one critic in response.
Dec 07, 2025
Venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, a co-founder of data platform company Palantir, is calling for the return of public hangings as part of a broader push to restore what he describes as "masculine leadership" to the US.
In a statement posted on X Friday, Lonsdale said that he supported changing the so-called "three strikes" anti-crime law to ensure that anyone who is convicted of three violent crimes gets publicly executed, rather than simply sent to prison for life.
"If I’m in charge later, we won’t just have a three strikes law," he wrote. "We will quickly try and hang men after three violent crimes. And yes, we will do it in public to deter others."
Lonsdale then added that "our society needs balance," and said that "it's time to bring back masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable."
Lonsdale's views on public hangings being necessary to restore "masculine leadership" drew swift criticism.
Gil Durán, a journalist who documents the increasingly authoritarian politics of Silicon Valley in his newsletter "The Nerd Reich," argued in a Saturday post that Lonsdale's call for public hangings showed that US tech elites are "entering a more dangerous and desperate phase of radicalization."
"For months, Peter Thiel guru Curtis Yarvin has been squawking about the need for more severe measures to cement Trump's authoritarian rule," Durán explained. "Peter Thiel is ranting about the Antichrist in a global tour. And now Lonsdale—a Thiel protégé—is fantasizing about a future in which he will have the power to unleash state violence at mass scale."
Taulby Edmondson, an adjunct professor of history, religion, and culture at Virginia Tech, wrote in a post on Bluesky that the rhetoric Lonsdale uses to justify the return of public hangings has even darker intonations than calls for state-backed violence.
"A point of nuance here: 'masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable' is how lynch mobs are described, not state-sanctioned executions," he observed.
Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll argued that Lonsdale's remarks were symbolic of a kind of performative masculinity that has infected US culture.
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," he wrote.
Tech entrepreneur Anil Dash warned Lonsdale that his call for public hangings could have unintended consequences for members of the Silicon Valley elite.
"Well, Joe, Mark Zuckerberg has sole control over Facebook, which directly enabled the Rohingya genocide," he wrote. "So let’s have the conversation."
And Columbia Journalism School professor Bill Grueskin noted that Lonsdale has been a major backer of the University of Austin, an unaccredited liberal arts college that has been pitched as an alternative to left-wing university education with the goal of preparing "thoughtful and ethical innovators, builders, leaders, public servants and citizens through open inquiry and civil discourse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hegseth Defends Boat Bombings as New Details Further Undermine Administration's Justifications
The boat targeted in the infamous September 2 "double-tap" strike was not even headed for the US, Adm. Frank Bradley revealed to lawmakers.
Dec 07, 2025
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Saturday defended the Trump administration's policy of bombing suspected drug-trafficking vessels even as new details further undermined the administration's stated justifications for the policy.
According to the Guardian, Hegseth told a gathering at the Ronald Reagan presidential library that the boat bombings, which so far have killed at least 87 people, are necessary to protect Americans from illegal drugs being shipped to the US.
"If you’re working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you," Hegseth said. "Let there be no doubt about it."
However, leaked details about a classified briefing delivered to lawmakers last week by Adm. Frank Bradley about a September 2 boat strike cast new doubts on Hegseth's justifications.
CNN reported on Friday that Bradley told lawmakers that the boat taken out by the September 2 attack was not even headed toward the US, but was going "to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname," a small nation in the northeast of South America.
While Bradley acknowledged that the boat was not heading toward the US, he told lawmakers that the strike on it was justified because the drugs it was carrying could have theoretically wound up in the US at some point.
Additionally, NBC News reported on Saturday that Bradley told lawmakers that Hegseth had ordered all 11 men who were on the boat targeted by the September 2 strike to be killed because "they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who US intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted."
This is relevant because the US military launched a second strike during the September 2 operation to kill two men who had survived the initial strike on their vessel, which many legal experts consider to be either a war crime or an act of murder under domestic law.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, watched video of the September 2 double-tap attack last week, and he described the footage as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.”
“Any American who sees the video that I saw will see its military attacking shipwrecked sailors,” Himes explained. “Now, there’s a whole set of contextual items that the admiral explained. Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in position to continue their mission in any way... People will someday see this video and they will see that that video shows, if you don’t have the broader context, an attack on shipwrecked sailors.”
While there has been much discussion about the legality of the September 2 double-tap strike in recent days, some critics have warned that fixating on this particular aspect of the administration's policy risks taking the focus off the illegality of the boat-bombing campaign as a whole.
Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, said on Friday that the entire boat-bombing campaign has been "illegal under both domestic and international law."
"All of them constitute murder because none of the victims, whether or not they were smuggling illegal narcotics, posed an imminent threat to life," she said. "Congress must take action now to stop the US military from murdering more people in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


