How is this legal?
Monday, Jun 16, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller
* It’s pretty obvious that this is legal under Illinois state law…
Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January, federal immigration authorities leading his mass deportation push have repeatedly asked the Chicago Police Department for the arrest records of immigrants.
In almost every case, records obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times show, the police department has handed over documents that include the names, addresses and country of origin of those targeted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection. […]
But, as the records obtained by the Sun-Times show, there are limits even in Chicago, a self-declared sanctuary city, on what information can be withheld. The police department’s disclosures to DHS, ICE and CBP show that, in releasing records such as arrest reports, it can provide information that’s useful to immigration enforcement agencies.
Between November 2022 and late this past March, those three federal agencies obtained the arrest reports for at least a dozen men under Illinois’ Freedom of Information Act. Some of them haven’t been convicted of a crime in Cook County. Others have lengthy arrest records that include serious charges.
State law is pretty clear on this topic. The feds used FOIA, which means the information is available to the public, and according to state law, that can be shared…
Unless presented with a federal criminal warrant, or otherwise required by federal law, a law enforcement agency or official may not: […]
permit immigration agents use of agency facilities or equipment, including any agency electronic databases not available to the public, for investigative interviews or other investigative or immigration enforcement purpose;
Unless lawmakers want to try and carve out ICE from FOIA, this is a non-story.
* However, the law also says this…
Unless presented with a federal criminal warrant, or otherwise required by federal law, a law enforcement agency or official may not: […]
enter into or maintain any agreement regarding direct access to any electronic database or other data-sharing platform maintained by any law enforcement agency, or otherwise provide such direct access to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Customs and Border Protection or any other federal entity enforcing civil immigration violations;
* I’m coming late to this story, but it’s difficult to see how this agreement falls within the law…
Despite an Illinois law prohibiting data sharing agreements between state law enforcement agencies and federal immigration authorities, the Illinois State Police makes available the names and information of individuals who they deem to be gang members to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. […]
A 2017 state law, the TRUST ACT, explicitly prohibits Illinois law enforcement agencies from entering into or maintaining agreements that would provide federal immigration authorities direct access to electronic databases. There is an exception if the agency is presented with a federal criminal warrant or if it’s otherwise required by federal law.
But according to agreements obtained by WTTW News, the Illinois State Police has shared data with ICE through a statewide computer system, the Law Enforcement Agencies Data System (LEADS), since 2008, including criminal history data and its gang member file, which could contain citizenship information, according to the LEADS manual.
* There are real problems with these government gang databases…
The Illinois State Police’s gang file has avoided the high level of scrutiny that Chicago’s own gang database received, which was discontinued in 2023 after investigators found that it disproportionately targeted Black and Latino Chicagoans, and contained numerous errors.
From 2009 through 2018, federal immigration agencies searched the Chicago Police Department’s gang database at least 32,000 times, according to a report from the city’s Office of Inspector General. While Chicago’s now-defunct gang database was active, it caused immigration officials to keep a man wrongly accused as a gang member for 10 months in detention.
* Good point…
The potential for federal immigration enforcement agencies to use noted gang affiliation as justification for deportation action has civil liberty groups concerned.
“They could be swept up off the street and disappeared, that’s the harm,” Ed Yohnka, communications director for the ACLU of Illinois, said of individuals who may be listed in Illinois State Police’s gang file. “And the harm could be based on nothing more than a third-party assertion.”
Obviously, if they’re truly gang members and they’re undocumented, they need to be kicked out of this country ASAP. But police gang databases are notoriously unreliable.
* Back to the story…
“All our agreements with law enforcement agencies are a standard criminal justice information sharing agreement. LEADS is not designed to collect immigration status information. Any agency, including ICE, using LEADS for purposes in violation of state or federal law would be violating the terms of our standard LEADS agreement. The Pritzker administration’s operation of LEADS is fully in compliance with state and federal law,” said Alex Gough, Pritzker’s press secretary.
Discuss.
- Jurist - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 9:42 am:
FOIA requests are a glaring vulnerability in our sanctuary city status for two reasons. 1) It is legal for all the reasons you state; 2) it would take initiative from a Law Department or CPD lawyer to realize what was going on and run it up the flagpole.
Procedurally, the legally inept Trump administration just scored one on the City. Surprised it took them that long to realize they could just send FOIAs and get the info they want.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 9:55 am:
Schuba is twisting himself in logical knots because he wants to write a story bashing CPD.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 11:49 am:
==if they’re truly gang members and they’re undocumented, they need to be kicked out of this country ASAP==
Due to the First Amendment right to freedom of association, which is also supposed to apply to people who are undocumented, it’s not against the law to be in a gang.
The government has decided that it can deport people for this anyway, but it’s far from obvious that this is a good policy. Particularly when so much gang membership is transient, of necessity, and associated lawbreaking is abandoned within a few years.
Additionally, removing people on this basis is one way that the US exports some of its gangs to other countries, strengthens the importance of gang ties, and develops their international networks.
- JB13 - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 11:49 am:
Illinois: Where many of the same people who believe it should be illegal for police agencies to help ICE deport foreign gang members also somehow believe police agencies should take kids away from homeschool families because they don’t file annual reports with the local school district.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 11:51 am:
And yes, some records are available via FOIA but it seems clear that CPD is giving federal immigration agencies expedited access to information.
==Any agency, including ICE, using LEADS for purposes in violation of state or federal law would be violating the terms of our standard LEADS agreement. The Pritzker administration’s operation of LEADS is fully in compliance with state and federal law,” said Alex Gough, Pritzker’s press secretary.==
Unless they plan to revoke access over this, it’s a meaningless statement.
- Juvenal - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 11:52 am:
I believe that FOIA requests should redact personall information that can be used to identify an individual, which I believe includes addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, and social security numbers.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 12:08 pm:
===but it seems clear that CPD is giving federal immigration agencies expedited access to information.===
Not sure how you’d outlaw that.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 12:17 pm:
==Not sure how you’d outlaw that.==
Yeah, I’m not saying it does or could break the law (unless I suppose there were a law that requests must be fulfilled in the order received, which would not be a good law).
I do think it is worth pointing out that going above and beyond for immigration as opposed to residents is an entirely optional policy choice CPD is making and that the elected officials/s in charge of it have not told it to stop.
- Jurist - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 12:30 pm:
I’m not sure we can say the CPD’s legal team has expedited the responses. If someone were to FOIA request the CPD’s pending FOIA requests by date, then we can see if they prioritized these FOIAs. All in all, the CPD’s track record on FOIA responsiveness has improved through the years, ironically, thanks to the CST shining a light on that issue.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 1:02 pm:
===I do think it is worth pointing out that going above and beyond for immigration as opposed to residents is an entirely optional policy choice CPD is making and that the elected officials/s in charge of it have not told it to stop.===
Well, that’s just like your opinion.
Pretty easy to redact one or multiple arrest reports.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 1:44 pm:
==Under Illinois’ records law, government agencies have five business days to respond to a request for public records, though they can get a five-day extension. Deadlines are often blown, though. Unresponsive agencies can face lawsuits and be ordered to turn over records by the Illinois attorney general’s office.
The Chicago Police Department responded on the same day that it got them to at least three requests for records from ICE and CBP, and DHS got a response to another request in three days.
The police didn’t provide the records that it had handed over to DHS, ICE and CBP in response to eight other requests.==
In case you don’t have reason to interpret the first 2 paragraphs as I do, read the 3rd. And then read it again.
- Jurist - Monday, Jun 16, 25 @ 2:00 pm:
That third paragraph does not specify if there were FOIA requests for CPD’s responses to the eight other requests. It does not even say the CST requested the records that “the police didn’t provide.”
And that first paragraph is a doozy. Would the CST want CPD to blow FOIA deadlines? All in all, a weird story that in summary states the CPD’s legal department timely complied with FOIA requests from the federal government.