A federal appeals court has temporarily halted an order that sought to restrict immigration agents’ use of force in the Chicago area, calling the lower-court ruling ‘too prescriptive.’ The Seventh Circuit panel cautioned against overinterpreting the stay, noting that a fast-track appeal could result in a more tailored and appropriate order. The decision comes after U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction citing allegations of excessive force during immigration operations that have led to over 3,000 arrests since September.
Ellis’ order barred agents from using physical force and chemical agents such as tear gas and pepper balls unless necessary to prevent an immediate threat. The judge said the use of these tools violated the constitutional rights of journalists and protesters, as witnesses described being tear-gassed, shot with pepper balls while praying, and having guns pointed at them. The ruling has sparked immediate backlash from the Justice Department, which argued that the order restricted law enforcement’s ability to carry out its duties and could ‘subvert’ the constitutional structure.
Justice Department lawyers argued that the order restricted law enforcement’s ability to carry out its duties and could ‘subvert’ the constitutional structure of the United States. The appeals court panel emphasized that the lower court’s order was ‘too prescriptive,’ as it specified the use of riot control weapons and other devices in a manner that ‘resembles a federal regulation.’ Instead, the panel suggested that a more balanced legal interpretation might emerge through the fast-track appeal process.
This legal battle is part of a broader national controversy over immigration enforcement practices. Earlier this month, the federal judge cited fears of obstruction in blocking ICE courthouse arrests during court proceedings, which added another layer of tension. The immigration operation in the Chicago area has drawn multiple lawsuits, including claims of inhumane conditions at a federal detention facility. These allegations prompted a federal judge and attorneys to visit the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement center outside Chicago last week, highlighting the growing scrutiny on immigration enforcement.
DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin called the stay ‘a win for the rule of law and for the safety of every law enforcement officer.’ However, critics argue that the decision could further erode trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve, particularly among activists and journalists who have been at the forefront of reporting on the situation. The case remains under review, and its ultimate outcome could influence future immigration enforcement policies across the country.