* Jon Seidel at the Sun-Times…
A week ago, a federal judge forbade agents from using gas and other “riot control” weapons without warning in Chicago as they carried out President Donald Trump’s deportation blitz.
That same judge took the bench early Thursday at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse, where she told one of Trump’s lawyers, bluntly, “I’m not blind.”
U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis cited reports in the Chicago Sun-Times and other media that have given her “serious concerns” about whether the Trump administration has followed her order in recent days.
Then she insisted that Russell Hott, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Chicago field office, appear in her courtroom Monday to clarify what’s going on. […]
“The field director is going to explain to me why I am seeing images of tear gas being deployed and reading reports that there were no warnings given before it was deployed,” Ellis said.
* The Tribune’s Jason Meisner…
* More from Seidel…
* Tribune…
Ellis’s restraining order forbids agents from firing tear gas and other projectiles at peaceful protesters, clergy or journalists unless they pose an immediate threat of physical harm to a person, and to do so only after issuing warnings. Agents were also ordered to stop dispersing people if they have a lawful right to be at a location. […]
In advance of Thursday’s hearing, the plaintiffs filed a motion asking for expedited discovery ahead of a hearing next week on a full injunction. The motion stated that both sides had met on Wednesday to discuss potential violations of the TRO, “in which federal officers appear to be using violence, tear gas, and other munitions against protestors and journalists.”
“Young children and even babies appear to have been subjected to the indiscriminate use of tear gas by defendants’ officers,” the motion stated. “And it does not appear that defendants’ agents are consistently wearing prominently displayed visible identification.”
The government, according to the motion, “believes the TRO has not been violated at all.”
- P. - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:27 am:
The Judge had directed the agents to wear identifiers. She indicated they could use personalized numerals. They aren’t doing that. The DOJ attorney was clearly unprepared in addition to not being tethered by reality but his ‘clients’ are also tossing these orders in a proverbial Dumpster.
- NIU Grad - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:29 am:
These people think this is all political theater, but I don’t think they realize that they’re going to be spending the next decade (or more) in front of judges dealing with lawsuits, court orders, consent decrees, and settlements. Once they put that badge on, this is real and no longer FOX News entertainment.
- Pundent - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:34 am:
The judge needs to start holding individuals in contempt. There have to be consequences for carrying out unlawful orders. Otherwise our judicial system will simply be ignored.
- Keyrock - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:35 am:
It took Judge Ellis a long time to enter the order, but she has been refreshingly quick about enforcing it. Good work.
- ArchPundit - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:45 am:
DHS claimed Bovino was on bed rest for two weeks at the beginning of this case and it’s been two weeks now, but he was also doing a round of interviews on the day after DHS claimed that to the judge. Seems likely the government is hiding supervisors to avoid being held accountable.
- Norseman - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:48 am:
Under their camo, the secret police are wearing an original Melania jacket emblazoned with “I don’t care”. Which is what they think about court orders.
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 11:54 am:
IL Republicans: “And while Pritzker and Johnson cry foul, a federal judge just confirmed what we already knew: ICE was following orders, and Democrat leaders were deliberately obstructing justice.”
Maybe the IL Republicans should pay attention to what the judges are actually ruling.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:03 pm:
=For CBP it “may be more workable.”=
CBP does not have legal authority to be here.
Maga “we are bad with maps”.
=“believes the TRO has not been violated at all.”=
They are actually trolling a federal judge. The trump admin and their people will literally say anything, making up things completely, without hesitation.
We have actually entered an Orwellian novel.
- Harrison - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:07 pm:
Cameras on ICE and other Federal agents are a great idea and will certainly provide close up evidence that cannot be edited against those who assault federal officers.
There is no federal statue requiring the cameras so how does a judge order this?
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:11 pm:
=== There is no federal statue requiring the cameras so how does a judge order this? ===
She didn’t order them to wear cameras. But if they do wear them, cams have to be turned on in specified circumstances.
Your attempts to derail/hijack conversations with subject changes or misinfo/disinfo is quite tiresome. I’m not gonna warn you again.
- Dismayed - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:15 pm:
=Cameras on ICE and other Federal agents are a great idea and will certainly provide close up evidence that cannot be edited against those who assault federal officers.=
Two words: January sixth.
- Harrison - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:21 pm:
I am just repeating an Associated Press story that is an order for ICE agents to wear body cameras by this Judge
https://apnews.com/article/chicago-immigration-crackdown-judge-d5414dffbbd9380f95211c2c18d653d2
- Charles Edward Cheese - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:22 pm:
At this point I half expect DOJ appeal to essentially ask the judge “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”
- JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:23 pm:
=Cameras on ICE and other Federal agents=
Sounds like you are ok with ICE agents in disguise attacking peaceful protestors and kidnapping US citizens.
It also sounds like you don’t mind that some federal agents (CBP) are acting illegally since they are hundreds of miles outside of their mandated jurisdiction.
As Rich pointed out, the judge didn’t order that but in reality why is it a problem? I mean if they are doing anything wrong they should be happy for the transparency opportunity since this is the self proclaimed most transparent administration in history. Right?
Or maybe they are as full of it as you are.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:28 pm:
===I am just repeating===
While ignoring what is clearly in this very post: Ellis tells both sides to get together and discuss this. “I would not require people to turn on a body camera that they don’t have.”
- BE - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:29 pm:
==“believes the TRO has not been violated at all.”==
Right up there with Speaker Johnson being asked about clergy being shot with pepperballs to the head and him replying that he doesn’t think that agents have crossed any lines.
- ArchPundit - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:30 pm:
In several cases DHS personnel had cameras that were not turned on. In the case where they shot a woman several times, I believe it was a body camera that was actually on that demonstrated she did not hit them. So DHS has some body cameras and probably quite a few, but they are leaving them off at convenient times.
- Mason County - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:35 pm:
I have watched a number of videos from different sources on what is happening. Obviously I do not have first hand eye witness observations. Increasingly it appears to be breaking away from specified areas of protest to more random acts of aggression that include public streets and residential areas.
No need for any NG but ALL law enforcement agencies should work together to stop anything other than peaceful protest.
- Garfield Ridge Guy - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 12:53 pm:
To the administration, it remains an unsettled question of law whether anyone, ever, has the authority to tell the Executive Branch not to do something that it wants to do. It’s greatly concerning that, for the Executive Branch, the answer isn’t “yes, sometimes.”
- Pundent - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:03 pm:
=So DHS has some body cameras and probably quite a few, but they are leaving them off at convenient times.=
Exactly what Judge Ellis is getting at. Some folks on here want to have their cake and eat it too. When the camera is capturing a hostile protestor they like it. But expecting the body camera to be on to capture the activities of ICE is something they rail against.
If you’ve got a camera on use it. And if you don’t the court should infer that you’re engaged in conduct you don’t want recorded.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:11 pm:
=No need for any NG but ALL law enforcement agencies should work together to stop anything other than peaceful protest.=
What do you think they should do about violent attacks by ICE on peaceful protestors and the illegal CBP operations?
Just a thought, but asking for identification from law enforcement has never before been categorized as “aggression”, “violence”, or even “obstruction”.
I’ll wait.
- Norseman - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:11 pm:
The secret police come with their own propagandist cameraman. They edit nice little macho misleading videos of the evil Chicago empire. That’s why JB and all recommend getting your smart phone cameras out and record.
- thechampaignlife - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:18 pm:
===I don’t believe that it will be possible, on a short timeline, to roll out a body cam program in the Chicago [area of responsibility] for ICE.===
Sounds like a you problem. If you want to conduct ICE operations in the Chicago area after having been chastised by courts repeatedly for violating rights and orders, being required to have body cams running to ensure you are following the court orders seems as reasonable as ankle monitors as a condition of probation. I would love to see the judge go that far.
- Harrison - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:22 pm:
The Federal judge mandates the Federal government procure cameras for ICE agents in the middle of a government shutdown, but as you say quite logically does not require them to turn on cameras they don’t have.
I will have to take the AP’s word for all this because there are no cameras or audio of the proceedings and the transcripts aren’t required to be released for 90 days.
Transparency for some but not all in the Federal government
- JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:23 pm:
= They edit nice little macho misleading videos of the evil Chicago empire.=
100%. This all has a weird and perverse proud boys feel to it. These are the misfits that joined once standards were abandoned. Them and Dean Cain that is.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:25 pm:
===I will have to take the AP’s word for all this===
Your loss. From an actually experienced federal criminal courts reporter: The details of that modification still needed to be ironed out Thursday morning.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/immigration/2025/10/16/judge-hauling-ice-official-into-court-as-aggressive-tactics-continue-despite-her-order-im-not-blind
From another experienced reporter: U.S. District Judge Sarah Ellis also said she was considering modifying the temporary restraining order issued last week to require any body-worn cameras agents are wearing to be turned on during an encounter with the public.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/10/16/judge-orders-ice-field-director-into-court-tear-gas/
Now, move along.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 1:48 pm:
=Ellis’s restraining order forbids agents from firing tear gas and other projectiles at peaceful protesters, clergy or journalists unless they pose an immediate threat of physical harm to a person, and to do so only after issuing warnings.=
Just wondering what the ice defenders think about blasting a priest in the head with pepper balls? If you think he was a threat, you don’t know what the word threat means.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 2:16 pm:
Back when we had laws and stuff like that, judges were pretty important. Now it’s just waiting for the Supreme Court to OK anything the administration wants to do.
- P. - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 3:36 pm:
***Increasingly it appears to be breaking away from specified areas of protest to more random acts of aggression that include public streets and residential areas.***
Yes. Like actually our neighborhoods. Clouds of teargas blowing down residential city blocks. Manhandling neighbors - note: not dangerous criminals, not protestors, not paid protestors, not crisis actors. Thanks for paying attention and please spread the word.
- Excitable Boy - Thursday, Oct 16, 25 @ 4:10 pm:
- random acts of aggression that include public streets and residential areas. -
Yeah, when people see their neighbors being tackled or dragged out of their cars they tend to get a little riled up.