A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked a judge’s restrictions on how U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents can respond to protests in Chicago, siding with the Trump administration in a decision that could influence ongoing debates about federal law enforcement tactics. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the government’s emergency request to pause an earlier order that required agents to issue warnings before using tear gas or non-lethal weapons, display clear identification, wear body cameras, and refrain from arresting or dispersing journalists covering immigration-related demonstrations.
The appeals panel said the original ruling by U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis effectively overstepped judicial authority and interfered with the executive branch’s ability to enforce federal law. While the judges emphasized that their decision did not undermine the protesters’ claims of constitutional violations, they argued that any restrictions must be more narrowly tailored.
Judge Ellis issued her order on November 6 after reviewing extensive testimony from protesters, journalists, and clergy members who described violent encounters with federal agents outside an immigration detention center in Broadview, Illinois, and in Chicago neighborhoods. Witnesses recounted incidents involving guns pointed at protesters’ heads, pepper-ball rounds striking a pastor during prayer, and allegations of retaliation against individuals filming ICE operations. Ellis stated that the government’s claims about violent protesters were not credible, citing several instances where she believed federal agents provided misleading accounts.
The Department of Homeland Security welcomed the appeals court decision, calling it a victory for public safety and law enforcement integrity. The ruling arrives as Chicago remains a focal point of the Trump administration’s intensified immigration enforcement initiatives under “Operation Midway Blitz,” which has included the deployment of tear gas in residential areas and the involvement of National Guard troops—moves that have sparked legal challenges and national scrutiny.
The appeals court has placed the case on an expedited schedule, meaning further review of Ellis’ reasoning is expected soon, keeping the legal battle over federal force and protest rights in Chicago far from resolved.


Apple App Store Injunction Largely Upheld as Appeals Court Rules on Epic Games Case
U.S. Expands Sanctions on Venezuela, Targeting Maduro Family and Oil Tankers
Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban Sparks Global Debate and Early Challenges
U.S. Special Forces Intercept Ship Carrying Military Components Bound for Iran
U.S. Pressures ICC to Limit Authority as Washington Threatens New Sanctions
Preservation Group Sues Trump Administration to Halt $300 Million White House Ballroom Project
Modi and Trump Hold Phone Call as India Seeks Relief From U.S. Tariffs Over Russian Oil Trade
Trump Signals Conditional Push for Ukraine Peace Talks as Frustration Mounts
New Epstein Photos Surface Showing Trump as Lawmakers Near Document Release Deadline
California, 18 States Sue to Block Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee
Trump Signs Executive Order to Establish National AI Regulation Standard
Environmental Group Sues to Block Trump Image on U.S. National Park Passes
Colombia’s Clan del Golfo Peace Talks Signal Mandatory Prison Sentences for Top Leaders
U.S. Lifts Sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Amid Shift in Brazil Relations
EU Court Cuts Intel Antitrust Fine to €237 Million Amid Long-Running AMD Dispute
Ireland Limits Planned Trade Ban on Israeli Settlements to Goods Only
Honduras Issues International Arrest Warrant for Ex-President Juan Orlando Hernández After U.S. Pardon 



