Attorney General Pam Bondi has issued a formal warning to former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, stating that she will be receiving a letter from the Department of Justice in response to Lightfoot’s recent public vow to ‘unmask’ ICE agents. During an appearance on ‘Jesse Watters Primetime,’ Bondi emphasized that Lightfoot’s plan to create a real-time portal tracking the alleged criminal activities of ICE and CBP agents could constitute a violation of federal law. Bondi highlighted that such disclosures could put federal agents at risk, and she cited several legal statutes that criminalize obstructing or impeding federal law enforcement. Bondi also noted that she is not only targeting Lightfoot but has also sent letters to other officials, including California’s Attorney General, as part of a broader effort to prevent actions that might interfere with federal operations. These letters warn of potential legal consequences for those who attempt to hinder federal investigations, with Bondi asserting that she will take strong action against any violations.
Lightfoot, during an interview on FOX32 Chicago’s ‘Chicago Report,’ claimed that the proposed ‘ICE Accountability Project’ would serve as a ‘centralized archive of all the purported criminal actions’ of ICE and CBP agents, with real-time updates for the public. She asserted that she has a constitutional right to document these activities, arguing that the agents operate on public property. However, Bondi argued that while individuals may have the right to observe public activities, disclosing the identities of federal agents could place them in danger. The Attorney General’s concern mirrors recent actions taken by the Department of Justice, which has been proactive in addressing what it deems as obstruction of federal law enforcement. Bondi’s efforts are part of a larger trend of federal officials taking a firm stance against any measures perceived as impeding their operations, including the threat of legal action against local leaders. This situation has sparked a broader debate about the balance between transparency and the protection of federal law enforcement from potential threats. As such, it remains to be seen how the public and local officials will respond to these legal threats, which could set a precedent for similar cases in the future.