The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily stayed a district judge’s injunction that had limited federal immigration agents’ use of force in the Chicago area, calling the order overly broad and too prescriptive. The appeals panel suggested an expedited appeal could produce a narrower, more tailored directive. The original injunction followed lawsuits alleging excessive force during an operation that has resulted in over 3,000 arrests since September and included testimony of tear gas exposure, pepper-ball strikes and guns being pointed at civilians.
Appeals Court Temporarily Pauses Limits on Immigration Agents’ Use of Force in Chicago Area
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily stayed a district judge’s injunction that had limited federal immigration agents’ use of force in the Chicago area, calling the order overly broad and too prescriptive. The appeals panel suggested an expedited appeal could produce a narrower, more tailored directive. The original injunction followed lawsuits alleging excessive force during an operation that has resulted in over 3,000 arrests since September and included testimony of tear gas exposure, pepper-ball strikes and guns being pointed at civilians.
04:51 AM, 11/20/2025Politics
A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily stayed a district judge’s preliminary injunction that had restricted how federal immigration agents may use force in the Chicago area, describing the order as “overbroad” and “too prescriptive.” The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it was cautious about broad readings of the stay and suggested that an expedited appeals process could yield a more narrowly tailored remedy.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued the injunction after a lawsuit brought by news organizations and protesters who alleged federal officers used excessive force during an immigration operation that has resulted in more than 3,000 arrests across Chicago and its suburbs since September.
Government lawyers argued the injunction impeded federal law enforcement and risked upsetting the constitutional separation of powers. In granting the stay, the three-judge appellate panel said the government was likely to succeed on those legal arguments and criticized the scope of the district court’s order.
"The preliminary injunction entered by the district court is overbroad," the ruling said, noting the order encompassed a wide range of defendants — from the President to the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice and anyone acting in concert with them — and went so far as to specify particular riot-control weapons and devices in a manner resembling a federal regulation.
The injunction had limited agents’ use of physical force and chemical agents such as tear gas and pepper balls except when necessary or to stop an immediate threat, concluding that current tactics infringed the constitutional rights of journalists and demonstrators. During a lengthy hearing, multiple witnesses described exposure to tear gas, being struck in the head with pepper balls while praying, and having guns pointed at them.
Judge Ellis also questioned the credibility of several witnesses presented by the federal government, singling out Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino, who led the Chicago-area operation before transferring to a new post. In response, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the appeals court’s stay "a win for the rule of law and for the safety of every law enforcement officer." Attorneys for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The Chicago-area operation has spawned multiple lawsuits, including claims about allegedly inhumane conditions at a federal immigration facility. That complaint prompted a federal judge and lawyers to inspect a longtime U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement center outside Chicago last week. Federal border agents who had been deployed to the Chicago region are expected to be redeployed to other locations in the coming weeks.