CHICAGO (AP) — A coalition of protesters, journalists and faith leaders moved Tuesday to dismiss their lawsuit challenging the aggressive tactics of federal immigration officers in the Chicago area, arguing that the Trump administration’s “Operation Midway Blitz” has largely ended.
While plaintiffs characterized their move as a win, the case was headed toward a skeptical appeals court.
The department oversees both the U.S Border Patrol and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
DHS and Bovino have defended the operation in Chicago, saying agents were going after criminals and faced hostile crowds.
The case also precipitated a trove of new details about the immigration operation in the Chicago area, including through private interviews with Bovino, body camera footage and witness testimonies in court.
CHICAGO (AP) — A coalition of protesters, journalists and faith leaders moved Tuesday to dismiss their lawsuit challenging the aggressive tactics of federal immigration officers in the Chicago area, arguing that the Trump administration’s “Operation Midway Blitz” has largely ended.
While plaintiffs characterized their move as a win, the case was headed toward a skeptical appeals court.
The court filing Tuesday noted that the federal officers led by senior U. S. Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino “are no longer operating in the Northern District of Illinois. ” Bovino left the Chicago area last month for North Carolina, but sporadic immigration arrests have continued by other federal agents.
“We received the relief we were seeking. They left,” said David Owens, an attorney representing the plaintiffs. “When the emergency goes away, things change. The “.
The attorneys also noted a blistering 223-page opinion by U. S. Last month, District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction limiting the use of force by federal agents, outlining her findings.
The order’s future was uncertain after an appeals court last month declared it to be “too prescriptive” and “overbroad.”. ” But the 7th U. S. Additionally, the Circuit Court of Appeals warned against “overreading” its stay of Ellis’ injunction and stated that a speedy appeal procedure might result in a “more tailored and appropriate” order. Later this month, the three-judge panel was scheduled to hear arguments.
Owens declined to detail the plaintiffs’ legal reasoning in dropping the case, including if the appeals court’s intervention played a role.
The injunction was in response to a lawsuit filed by news outlets and protesters who claimed federal officers used excessive force during an immigration crackdown that has netted more than 3,000 arrests since September across the nation’s third-largest city and its many suburbs. Among other things, Ellis’ order restricted agents from using physical force and chemical agents such as tear gas and pepper balls, unless necessary or to prevent an “an immediate threat. ” She said the current practices violated the constitutional rights of journalists and protesters.
“The brutality of Operation Midway Blitz was meticulously documented for everyone to see, the constitutional rights of civilians throughout the region were upheld, and the Trump administration’s justifications for its conduct were exposed as blatant lies because of the work of many Chicagoans, including the courageous plaintiffs in this case,” said lawyer Steve Art.
A message left Tuesday for the Department of Homeland Security was not immediately returned. The department oversees both the U. S Border Patrol and U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
DHS and Bovino have defended the operation in Chicago, saying agents were going after criminals and faced hostile crowds.
The case also precipitated a trove of new details about the immigration operation in the Chicago area, including through private interviews with Bovino, body camera footage and witness testimonies in court. Ellis cited each of these in her opinion, describing agents launching tear gas without warning, aiming rubber rounds at reporters, tackling protesters and laughing as blood oozed from a demonstrator’s ear — scenes that Ellis says were flatly at odds with the government’s own narratives. “Judge Ellis’s powerful opinion stands as the final word in this case, and as a defining document of our time. ”.
