The guy that ICE shot 10 times committed the crime of filming them.
Yucky/
That is the guy they took down, with one agent banging on his head and then shooting him.
Probably for stating that he had the right to film, and paid the price for being right with his life from an asshole agent's firearm.
There are the persons called auditors in the US, since spreading to other countries doing similar.
Usually they setup on public land ( sidewalk for example ), or in public ( gov't ) buildings and stand ground when confronted with trespass or other order( arrest ) from police that respond to the 911 call of a person causing a disturbance. The call usually comes from a nearby business of government building after they sent out a security guard or manager to chase him away with no luck.
In the USA, and Canada, it is constitutionally legal to film on public on or in public areas as long as non-harassing, directly into windows, and some other caveats such as filming children outside a school ( which is legal except you will have a lot of explaining to do in front of a judge ).
Some police so not know the rules and try to intimidate, siding at the outset with the complainant until educated, and then most of the time back off, tell the uniformed and lying complainant the actual law, and leave.
One does not need to be the press, as the right to film applies to everyone.
Except in Quebec where you may have to ask a person's permission to film, or post, due to more stringent privacy laws ( does that include police? - maybe, might see you in court if the situation desires it from the police or prosecutor's perspective ). Quebec always has to be different.
The rest of Canada follows along similar to the USA where in public there is no expectation of privacy when out and about in public.
There are auditors in the rest of Canada. I have not seen one from Quebec.
It would seem that the ICE agents, were applying the version of expected privacy that Quebec has adopted, even though ICE is in the USA.
One can see the edge effect of adopting a more 'progressive' version of constitutional rights such as that of Quebec, which by the way most people would agree with, even though there are cameras everywhere - on buildings, hydro poles, cars, at the ATM, at work, at sporting and entertainment venues ...., - filming them constantly. Put an actual person with a camera on the street and people go nuts. The USA and Canadian ( barring Quebec ) constitutions promote the right to know for the public, and lesson the will of the 'nuts' who would want nothing less than censorship.