Federal Court Challenges Strict Guidelines on Immigration Agent Force

Thu Nov 20 2025 05:43:09 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

A federal appeals court in Chicago has temporarily lifted restrictions on the use of force by immigration agents, labeling previous orders as overly broad.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a stay on a district court's order limiting the use of force by federal immigration agents in Chicago, deeming it excessively broad and prescriptive. The injunction was initially put in place following allegations of excessive force during immigration raids that have led to thousands of arrests. The court suggests a more tailored order could be forthcoming amidst ongoing challenges to the immigration operations in the region.

CHICAGO (AP) — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily halted an order restricting the use of force by federal immigration agents in the Chicago area, calling it overbroad and too prescriptive. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cautioned against misinterpreting its stay, suggesting that a rapid appeal process could result in an order that is more appropriately tailored.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction in response to a lawsuit filed by news outlets and protesters, alleging that federal officers employed excessive force during an immigration crackdown that has led to over 3,000 arrests since September across Chicago and its suburbs.

Government attorneys contended that the injunction limited the enforcement of federal laws and could undermine the constitutional framework. In issuing their stay, the three-judge panel indicated that the government's case is likely to prevail in court, criticizing the broad reach of the injunction.

According to the ruling, the order restricted too many defendants, including the President and the entire Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, violating necessary legal boundaries regarding law enforcement practices.

Judge Ellis's injunction had constrained agents’ usage of physical force and chemical agents like tear gas unless there was an immediate threat. She determined that current practices violated the constitutional rights of journalists and protestors alike.

Witnesses before the court described harrowing experiences with tear gas and physical assaults during the protests against immigration policies. In weighing the testimonies, the court determined that previous witnesses for the Trump administration lacked credibility.

As disputes continue over the immigration operation in Chicago, which has spurred multiple lawsuits including allegations of inhuman conditions at local immigration facilities, the stakes for those involved remain high. The immigration enforcement policy has been met with persistent resistance from various community factions, and any further rulings will have significant implications for the relationship between federal agents and the communities they serve.