Federal judge issues injunction limiting force by immigration agents in Chicago


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Ruling

A federal judge issued an injunction limiting how immigration agents can use force during Chicago’s Operation Midway Blitz, citing false statements by a Border Patrol official.

Requirements

The order requires agents to give warnings before using tear gas or riot control weapons and takes effect immediately despite the federal government’s request for a delay.

Government’s response

The Department of Homeland Security called the injunction “an extreme act,” and the government plans to appeal.


Full story

A federal judge plans to issue an injunction that will restrict how federal immigration agents can use force while conducting operations, according to reports. U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis said that a high-ranking Border Patrol official lied multiple times about the level of danger that protesters and journalists allegedly posed during Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago, The Associated Press reported.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

The judge issued the injunction after journalists and protesters sued the government, claiming that federal law enforcement officers were using intense force during the immigration operation. Ellis previously issued a temporary restraining order barring federal agents from using tear gas or riot control weapons unless they are in immediate danger. The judge also ruled that before agents can use these kinds of weapons, they must give two clear warnings telling protesters to disperse or move before any force is used.

“I see little reason for the use of force that the federal agents are currently using,” Ellis said, as reported by the AP. “I don’t find defendants’ version of events credible.”

The judge sided entirely with the protesters and journalists. The federal government asked the judge to delay her order while they appeal it to a higher court. The judge denied the government’s request, saying it has not shown that it’s likely to win the appeal, so the injunction goes into effect immediately.

The Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations in Chicago have sparked numerous court battles. Judges ordered the government to improve conditions at what activists say is an unofficial immigrant detention center and ordered a halt to a planned National Guard deployment.

Gregory Bovino, a senior Border Patrol commander, testified under oath in court last week. He was questioned about how he and the agents under his command used physical force, both in carrying out immigration enforcement and in dealing with protesters or ordinary people. Bovino gave two depositions.

During Wednesday’s hearing, lawyers argued about several tense encounters during the immigration enforcement operation, many involving Bovino. One key incident involved him allegedly throwing gas at a crowd after saying he was struck by a rock.

Ellis said Bovino admitted to lying about claiming someone hit him with a rock, because video footage contradicted his statement. Ellis also noted that there was video evidence showing Bovino tackling a man and that the commander denied using force in that situation.

The federal government confirmed in court that Bovino now has a body camera and has been trained to use it, as previously ordered by Ellis.

Government response and next steps

The Department of Homeland Security responded to Ellis’ injunction, issuing a statement, that said in part, “This injunction is an extreme act by an activist judge that risks the lives and livelihoods of law enforcement officers,” as reported by CBS News.

The federal government is expected to appeal the decision.

Cassandra Buchman (Weekend Digital Producer) and Cole Lauterbach (Managing Editor) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

A federal court injunction restricts the use of force by federal immigration agents after a judge found evidence of misconduct during operations in Chicago, raising questions about law enforcement accountability and civil liberties during immigration enforcement.

Use of force by law enforcement

The court-imposed limits address concerns about the methods federal agents use during immigration operations and the appropriate use of force against protesters and journalists.

Accountability and oversight

Judicial findings of misleading testimony and misconduct highlight ongoing concerns about transparency, honesty and oversight in law enforcement practices.

Civil liberties and protests

The case underscores tensions between government enforcement actions and the rights of protesters, journalists and the general public, particularly around freedom of assembly and press.

Get the big picture

Context corner

The events are set against the backdrop of a federal crackdown called Operation Midway Blitz, ordered by President Donald Trump, focusing heightened immigration enforcement in Democratic strongholds like Chicago and leading to clashes and increased legal scrutiny.

Diverging views

Articles categorized as left emphasize the judge's findings that federal agents lied and stress the impact on civil rights, while the right-leaning article reports the judge's ruling but does not focus on accusations of dishonesty or broader implications for law enforcement policy.

History lesson

Federal intervention in local law enforcement, particularly regarding protests and immigration, has sparked legal challenges in other U.S. cities in recent years, with courts sometimes restricting certain police tactics to protect constitutional rights.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left emphasizes official misconduct, using terms like "lied," "rips into" and "extreme brutality" to frame federal actions as an aggressive "blitz" and the judge's order as a necessary check on power, highlighting the judge's strong condemnation.
  • Media outlets in the center maintain a neutral tone, simply stating the judge will "restrict using force" without emotional framing.
  • Media outlets on the right politicize the judiciary by identifying the judge as an "Obama Judge," implying partisan bias and focusing on restrictions placed on immigration agents.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

119 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction requiring federal agents in Chicago to minimize force against protesters and journalists, citing violations of constitutional rights and excessive use of force.
  • Ellis found that federal agents used "extreme brutality" against peaceful protesters, which she deemed inappropriate and dangerous to civil rights.
  • The injunction mandates that agents use force only when necessary to prevent serious harm, provide warnings and wear body cameras for accountability.
  • Protesters described feeling unsafe and anxious due to aggressive tactics used by agents, as stated during the hearing.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis ordered federal agents in Chicago to restrict using force against peaceful protesters and media, refining an earlier temporary restraining order.
  • The suit stems from Operation Midway Blitz, an eight-week enforcement campaign during which attorneys representing protesters, clergy and journalists allege repeated excessive tear gas and pepper spray use, violating an Oct. 9 temporary restraining order.
  • Videos and witnesses show protesters struck by pepper balls with visible injuries, tear gassed and having guns pointed at them while recording, while Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino defended agents and faces claims he lied about being hit by a rock.
  • U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis required agents' body cameras and at least two verbal warnings before tear gas use, finding current practices unconstitutional. President Donald Trump's administration is expected to appeal.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.