The judge who handed down a sweeping order restricting the feds’ use of force during their deportation campaign in Chicago is planning a March 2 trial that could lead to a more permanent ruling ahead of a possible surge of agents in the spring.
The Chicago Sun-Times reported this week that U.S. Border Patrol Cmdr. Gregory Bovino and many of his agents were headed out of town, but 1,000 of them could return in March. That’s four times the roughly 250 agents who’ve been in town the last few months.
During a hearing Thursday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis told lawyers, “All I know about this is what I’ve read in the paper, which is that the operation is changing, I guess, over the next few months. … But then I read that they intend to be back in March.”
Justice Department lawyer Andrew Warden told the judge, “There has been a transition of officers. There always is. Folks come in and out of operations. As far as, ‘will there be a sort of ramp-up in the spring?’ I don’t know whether that’s the case.”
Ellis still insisted on moving forward with the trial, in anticipation of any surge. Lawyers told her the trial could last three or four days. The situation is dynamic, though, given that the Trump administration has asked the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene.
Ellis did not ask directly whether Bovino had left town.
The case at issue centers on the feds’ use of force against protesters and journalists. It was brought by media organizations including the Chicago Headline Club, Block Club Chicago and the Chicago Newspaper Guild, which represents journalists at the Chicago Sun-Times.
Ellis handed down a preliminary injunction in the case last week. It forbids agents from using “riot control weapons” against protesters or observers who pose no immediate threat, and without two warnings. It also restricts the use of chokeholds, and it requires agents to display identifying star or badge numbers “conspicuously” in “two separate places.”
Days after she handed down her injunction, the news broke that Bovino and his agents were leaving town. Homeland Security officials have insisted their “Operation Midway Blitz” will continue, and a source told the Sun-Times that roughly 100 agents would remain.
Meanwhile, lawyers are still waiting for Ellis to hand down a written opinion supporting her preliminary injunction. The judge said she expects to deliver it next week. Soon after she does, she told Warden she wants to be able to unseal any evidence that she relied upon — including video.
The evidence could be made public as early as Nov. 24.
The Sun-Times, Chicago Public Media and Chicago Tribune intervened in the case to seek the unsealing of that evidence. Ellis also told Warden she wants government lawyers to finish reviewing additional evidence for unsealing by Dec. 19.
Warden had initially asked to have until Jan. 9 to finish the review.
This all comes while lawyers also have an eye on the 7th Circuit. The Trump administration this week asked the appeals court to block Ellis’ preliminary injunction, arguing it is “overbroad and unworkable” and “threatens the safety of federal officers.”
Lawyers for the plaintiffs responded late Thursday. They told the appeals court “the Trump Administration has declared ‘war’ on Chicago,” that Ellis’ reasoning was sound, and that her order inflicts no harm on the feds.
Their legal team also filed a notice with Ellis Thursday of alleged violations of her order. Among other things, they pointed to agents’ use of flash bangs and tear gas in Little Village Saturday, when the feds say someone opened fire on agents.
The Justice Department purportedly told the plaintiffs’ lawyers that, at 9:25 a.m. Saturday “an unknown Latino male in a black Jeep shot five times at federal agents and sped away.” They said “a person has been arrested who matches the description of the shooter, and that person was in possession of a weapon.”
They also said “There should be body-worn camera footage for these incidents.”
However, the plaintiffs’ lawyers say they have asked “repeatedly” for “documentary or video evidence” and had “not received any documents” as of Thursday afternoon.
Neither the reporter nor editors who worked on this story — including some represented by the Newspaper Guild — have been involved in the lawsuit described in this article.