# What You Need to Know About How Tear Gas Harms Kids
Law enforcement use of tear gas against children raises serious civil rights and public health concerns. ProPublica's investigation documents the physiological and developmental harms that tear gas inflicts on minors, with particular focus on deployments by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and municipal police during protests in Minneapolis and Portland.
Tear gas, the chemical irritant typically containing chlorobenzalmalononitrile (CS) or oleoresin capsicum (OC), causes immediate respiratory distress, eye damage, and skin burns. Children face heightened vulnerability. Their respiratory systems remain underdeveloped. Their eyes sit closer to ground level where gas concentrations peak. Long-term exposure risks include chronic respiratory issues, developmental delays, and psychological trauma from repeated chemical weapon deployment.
The use of riot control agents against children implicates multiple legal frameworks. The Chemical Weapons Convention restricts tear gas in warfare but permits domestic law enforcement use. However, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and domestic constitutional protections, including the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, constrain law enforcement authority. Several jurisdictions have enacted restrictions on tear gas deployment near schools, parks, and residential areas where children congregate.
Federal agencies and state police departments deployed tear gas extensively during 2020 protests, sometimes directly targeting areas with children present. Multiple lawsuits have challenged these tactics as violating constitutional protections against excessive force and state tort laws. Some municipalities banned tear gas entirely following these incidents.
Medical researchers document acute injuries including chemical pneumonitis, corneal abrasion, and second-degree burns. Long-term studies remain limited. The American Academy of Pediatrics has warned against tear gas use near children, citing developmental risks.
Proposed reforms include legislative bans on