chicago

Federal judge says Trump officials 'lied multiple times' under oath

In a new 233-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis found that many top officials in President Donald Trump's administration "lied multiple times" under oath.

The Thursday ruling issued a preliminary injunction barring federal agents from using force in Chicago. It has already been appealed and put on hold by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Chicago Sun Times reporter Jon Seidel said.

Legal analysts Mark Joseph Stern of Slate and independent journalist Julie DiCaro sorted through the lengthy opinion, finding citations of "widespread misrepresentations that call into question everything" they "say they are doing in their characterization of what is happening."

Her ruling then claims that their testimony is objectively false, Stern said, broadly discrediting the Trump administration.

"After reviewing all the evidence submitted to the Court and listening to the testimony elicited at the preliminary injunction hearing, during depositions, and in other court proceedings, the Court finds Defendants’ evidence simply not credible," Ellis said, according to DiCaro.

At one point, in footnote six, DiCaro cited Ellis writing, "In another case considering some of the same evidence presented to this Court, another court in this district also found that the perceptions of certain of Defendants’ declarants, such as [Russell] Hott and [Deputy Chief Patrol Agent Daniel] Parra, were not reliable."

"But a review of [evidence submitted by Defendants] shows the opposite — supporting Plaintiffs’ claims and undermining all of Defendants’ claims that their actions toward protesters, the press, and religious practitioners have been, as Bovino has stated, 'more than exemplary,'" the judge also wrote.

In a section where she addressed the testimony of Gregory Bovino, commander-at-large of the U.S. Border Patrol, Judge Ellis found that he also lied under oath on several occasions.

"When shown a video of agents hitting Rev. Black with pepper balls, Bovino denied seeing a projectile hit Rev. Black in the head," Judge Ellis wrote.

"In another video ...he obviously tackles [Scott] Blackburn [one of Plaintiffs’ declarants]...But instead of admitting to using force against Blackburn, Bovino denied it and ...stated that force was used against him," the ruling continued.

"Most tellingly, Bovino admitted in his deposition that he lied multiple times about the events that occurred in Little Village that prompted him to throw tear gas at protesters," the judge added.

"Defendants, however, cannot simply create their own narrative of what happened, misrepresenting the evidence to justify their actions," the judge wrote.

She ultimately explains, "These are not the only inconsistencies and incredible representations in the record. While Defendants may argue that the Court identifies only minor inconsistencies, every minor inconsistency adds up, and at some point, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to believe."

Read the full ruling here.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Federal judge deals 'major blow' to Trump's agenda in ruling with nationwide implications

A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that President Donald Trump's administration unlawfully arrested and detained hundreds of people across the country as part of its immigration crackdown, and ordered them to be released by November 21.

CNN host Boris Sanchez reported Wednesday that the decision by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Cummings (an appointee of former President Joe Biden) was a "major blow" to Trump's mass deportation efforts, while reporter Whitney Wild described the ruling was an "enormous win" for plaintiffs' attorneys suing the administration. She observed that Judge Cummings pointed out that more than 600 people detained across the country "have no deportation orders" and "no criminal history."

"This more practically applies to all 3,000 people who are who have been arrested by ICE and Customs and Border [Protection] between June and October," Wild said. "But most practically speaking, it applies to 615 people who are currently in custody all across the country."

According to Wild, plaintiffs' attorneys believe roughly 1,100 immigrants "simply left voluntarily after they were placed in custody because they just they gave up on their immigration status fight and chose to leave the United States." However, attorney Mark Fleming told CNN affiliate WLS that the ruling proved their argument that a bulk of the administration's arrests of immigrants in Chicago, Illinois this summer and fall — under the direction of Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino — were illegal.

"For the last two months, the terrorizing of our neighborhoods, the brutalizing of people here has all been unlawful," Fleming said. "That's what it's going to show. It's going to show that all of this, all of the tactics of Mr. Bovino, all of the tactics of ICE have been unlawful in the vast, vast majority of arrests."

So far, the Department of Homeland Security has not yet said if it will appeal Judge Cummings' decision to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, though Fleming told WLS that he understood that the Department of Justice was planning to consult with Solicitor General D. John Sauer (one of Trump's former personal attorneys) about whether to file an appeal. However, Wild reported that the ruling may potentially have nationwide implications.

"More broadly, the question is, what does this mean for cases all across the country?" Wild said. "... The attorney for the ACLU told me that she believes that there are other cases across the country that are similar. And so you will start to see more cases end up just like this, with judges simply saying that these people who are in custody, it's completely improper."

Watch the segment below:


- YouTube www.youtube.com

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Judge says Trump border commander lied to court about use of force incident

ABC News reports the Border Patrol official in charge of Trump’s immigration crackdown in Chicago admitted to lying about a thrown rock before launching tear gas at protesters.

U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis said Thursday that Patrol Commander Greg Bovino fabricated claims about the Oct. 23 incident, which was caught on camera with Bovino throwing a gas canister at demonstrators in Chicago's Little Village neighborhood without giving a verbal warning — a violation of the judge's earlier temporary restraining order limiting the use of force, the judge said. That same day, the judge issued a preliminary injunction limiting the use of force during immigration arrests and protests.

"Mr. Bovino and the Department of Homeland Security claimed that he had been hit by a rock in the head before throwing the tear gas, but video evidence disproves this. And he ultimately admitted he was not hit until after he threw the tear gas," Ellis said.

DHS initially defended Bovino's actions saying that a Border Patrol transport van transporting undocumented immigrants was attacked by demonstrators.

"The mob of rioters grew more hostile and violent, advancing toward agents and began throwing rocks and other objects at agents, including one that struck Chief Greg Bovino in the head," Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in an October statement.

But Bovino proved McLaughlin’s statement incorrect.

ABC News reached out to DHS in the aftermath of Bovino’s confession but DHS officials responded by criticizing the judge's decision to grant a preliminary injunction.

“This injunction is an extreme act by an activist judge that risks the lives and livelihoods of law enforcement officers,” the official said.

Commenters on X slammed Bovino’s dishonesty.

“I’d sure as s—— go to jail if had lied about my actions,” posted retired veteran Scott Warhin on X.

“In any other era in America, Greg Bovino would immediately be fired for flagrantly lying under oath in court,” complained another critic on X. “But Trump loves criminals and miscreants. America has had enough of this s—— show.”

Read the ABC report at this link.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Noem doubles down after governor asks her to not use 'tear gas' near children on Halloween

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem is ignoring a request from one state official to give trick-or-treating families a break on Halloween.

The Daily Beast reported Thursday that during a Fox News interview, the DHS secretary ignored a plea from Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) for the DHS to pause aggressive immigration enforcement actions in Chicago on Friday, when kids in the Windy City will be walking neighborhood streets in celebration of Halloween.

"Illinois families deserve to spend Halloween weekend without fear," Pritzker wrote in a Wednesday letter to Noem. "No child should be forced to inhale tear gas or other chemical agents while trick or treating in their own neighborhood."

However, Noem told Fox News' Sandra Smith that despite Halloween festivities, ICE would still be "out on the streets in full force, and increase activities to make sure kids are safe."

"We will be out there to make sure that they can be safe, enjoy the holidays, spend some time with their families and their neighbors and communities," she continued. "And then they don’t have to be the victim of a crime because of these illegal aliens that are in our country victimizing them."

Pritzker was likely referring to an incident on October 25, when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents fired tear gas canisters into a crowd of children headed to a Halloween event. Earlier this month, ICE agents deployed tear gas in Chicago's Brighton neighborhood, which affected 13 local police officers on the scene.

In response to the tear-gassing incidents, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis forced U.S. Customs and Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino to wear a body camera and give daily reports to the court. She also voiced concerns about ICE agents not identifying themselves to members of the public when asked.

Click here to read the Beast's report in its entirety (subscription required).

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Judge gives Trump Border Patrol commander an ultimatum after multiple 'violations'

During a hearing on Tuesday morning, October 28, Gregory Bovino — the U.S. Border Patrol chief in charge of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown in Chicago — appeared in the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis. And the judge wanted answers, aggressively confronting Bovino about incidents of excessive force during the immigration raids in that city.

Politico's Shia Kapos detailed their exchanges in a thread posted on X, formerly Twitter, that morning. Later, Block Club Chicago reporter Mina Bloom described the hearing in an article published in the afternoon.

According to Kapos, Bovino entered the courtroom in his green fatigues — and Ellis "immediately" called him to the stand, reminding him of the "obligation we each have under the Constitution" to tell the truth.

Bovino, Kapos tweeted, wasted no time before she started grilling Bovino and demanded answers about the raids in Chicago. And she voiced her concerns about a range of issues, from agents failing to adequately identify themselves to agents not using bodycams.

Kapos tweeted, "Judge is now discussing concerns that agents don't always identify themselves. Bovino says: 'I instructed all agents under my command to ... place an identifier conspicuously on their uniform.' The reason it's no always seen, he says, is because equipment may cover it ... Next, judge urges Bovino to make sure agents wear cameras. 'The cameras are your friend,' said the judge. Asked if he wears one, (Bovino) says he has not received body-worn camera or training. She says 'how about by Friday' you get one."

Ellis, according to Kapos, was quite aggressive when it came to grilling Bovino about use of excessive force.

Kapos noted, "Judge Ellis pulls out a file of 'violations over the last week or so' including a woman who says two agents were on top of her, one with his knee on her back 'and no visible identification' and another instance when a chemical spray was deployed, 'and there was no warning' ... Bovino responds to the judge, saying, 'I believe each situation is dependent on the situation. I would want to learn more before I say anything one way or another ... I don't know all the facts.'"

Ellis noted an incident involving children in Halloween costumes.

According to Kapos, "Now judge is zeroing in on the case of kids in Halloween costumes celebrating Halloween in their Old Irving Park neighborhood. 'I can only imagine how terrified they were.' Judge says. 'Their sense of safety was shattered... it should have been a really happy day.'"

The judge also stressed that protesters have a right to peacefully demonstrate — regardless of whether Bovino likes it or not.

Kapos tweeted, "Judge is scanning through complaints: tear gas thrown, another agent without identification. Regarding protesters or others yelling at agents, "they don't have to like what you're doing. And that's OK. ...they can't get tear-gassed."

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Former US attorney reveals how Trump official's 'shamelessness' could lead to charges

Former U.S. Attorney and legal commentator Harry Litman said Monday that President Donald Trump’s administration is displaying “shamelessness” in its defense of its use of force against protestors.

Last week, agents from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sparked backlash when they used tear gas in the streets of Chicago, Illinois to disperse a crowd of protesters. Border Control Commander Greg Bovino was photographed allegedly carrying a tear-gas canister toward protesters in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago, prompting widespread criticism.

A coalition of journalists, protesters and clergy filed a notice claiming that Bovino violated a temporary restraining order issued on October 9 by U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis by deploying at least one canister of tear gas at the crowd.

The court order prohibits use of “less-lethal” or riot-control weapons (including tear gas) against people who do not pose an immediate threat, and requires at least two audible warnings before deploying such weapons, absent exigent circumstances.

Bovino defended his actions, and he is scheduled to appear before a federal court on Tuesday.

The court will examine whether Bovino had his body-worn camera activated and whether he gave at least two audible warnings before deploying the tear gas.

Speaking about the incident and the judge's possible action against ICE during a segment on CNN Monday afternoon, Litman said: "In the past, just simply being found in contempt of a court order would be really a strong chastisement by a district court. Again, that seems to be a factor that is also out the window. There's a certain lack of, you know ... shamelessness to this all. But if it if it continues, I think you'll hear her ... hold Bovino expressly in contempt of court."

He continued: "We'll see if they try to wriggle out of it. But in general, this is part of a whole secondary issue in these ICE cases. There's on the one hand, approaching people without any reason, just willy nilly, which the law forbids. But then second, doing it with unreasonable force. Bovino himself is accused of pointing a gun at a veteran, saying, 'bang, bang, you're dead, liberal' and that sort of thing."

Litman added that the situation is "particularly fraught" now because Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys who represent continually in the uncomfortable position of either trying to defend or not even knowing what those folks are saying, how it's typically handled.

Addressing the penalty options a federal judge has if it is found that agents like Bovino violated the temporary restraining order in Chicago, Litman said: "They're broad, but also kind of amorphous. But if he were, I don't expect this to happen tomorrow and he has to sit for a deposition as well as a five-hour deposition [on] November 5th. But theoretically, he could be held in contempt, including criminal contempt. He could be personally fined and the like. There's always the difficulty of, do you go against the individual officer or the United States? But that's what's in the background."

Watch the segment below:

- YouTube www.youtube.com

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

'Not what we signed up to do': National Guard officers vow to defy Trump’s orders

Even though President Donald Trump wants to deploy the National Guard to patrol the streets of Chicago, Illinois, two officers are now directly disobeying those orders.

CBS News reported Monday that Staff Sgt. Demi Palacek (who is running as a Democrat for the Illinois State Legislature) and Capt. Dylan Blaha (who is running for Congress as a Democrat) are both promising to refuse to help the Trump administration secure immigration enforcement operations in the United States' third-largest city due to a crisis of conscience.

"It's disheartening to be forced to go against your community members and your neighbors," Palacek said. "It feels illegal. This is not what we signed up to do."

Trump had previously federalized 500 National Guard troops from both the Illinois and Texas National Guard to safeguard Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they carried out arrests in the Windy City, and the Chicago deployment is still being litigated. However, Capt. Blaha told CBS he felt those orders were illegal and felt compelled to refuse them if they were given.

"I signed up to defend the American people and protect the Constitution," Blaha said. "When we have somebody in power who's actively dismantling our rights — free speech, due process, freedom of the press — it's really hard to be a soldier right now."

According to CBS, any member of the military who directly disobeys orders can be subjected to imprisonment, a court martial or even felony charges. The punishment will ultimately depend on who gave the order, whether the service member is under state or federal jurisdiction and the details behind their insubordination. Despite the potential consequences, Palacek told CBS she felt obligated to "definitely" refuse any order to deploy to Chicago.

"I'm not going to go against my community members, my family and my culture. I believe this is the time to be on the right side of history," she said.

"Look at 1930s, 1940s Germany," Blaha told CBS. "There is a point where if you didn't stand up to the Gestapo, are you just actively one of them now?"

Click here to read CBS' full report.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Official says 'kissing' Trump's backside should not determine if a city gets 'militarized'

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul has no taste for San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie’s honeyed approach to discouraging President Donald Trump from sending in National Guard troops to occupy the city.

The New York Times recently reported that when confronted with the possibility of being occupied, Mayor Lurie “stayed calm. He worked the phones. He ‘power mapped.’”

Using his connection to prominent business leaders, the Times reports Lurie lobbied “a host of billionaires” to “deliver the message, in the most diplomatic way possible, that San Francisco was not the apocalyptic landscape that the president sees on Fox News.”

While Lurie’s supporters say he used “quiet leadership and his ability to work the levers behind the scenes,” Raoul told MSNBC anchors that he feels no such compulsion.

“Excuse my French, but kissing the a-- of the president should not be the prerequisite of whether or not our cities are militarized,” Raoul told “The Weekend” host Jackie Alemany. “The prerequisites are set out by Congress and it shouldn't be whether or not a particular mayor or particular governor falls out of favor with the president. That's a dangerous prerequisite to set as to when our national guard is federalized.”

“If I don't like you this week, I get to send the military into your city? That makes no sense,” Raoul added. “That's not what the founders had in mind. And that's not what Congress has laid out.”

Raoul went on to slam White House advisor Stephen Miller’s claim that local government officials who direct police officers to arrest lawbreaking ICE officers are themselves engaging in “criminal activity.”

“We have state laws … and ICE does not have a license to commit battery against our citizens,” Raoul said. “They have a certain level of immunity, but it's not unlimited. And this threat coming from Stephen Miller — who is not the greatest legal authority — is a bit is a bit hollow.”

“Even by the representation of ICE officials, our local law enforcement has kept the peace,” Raoul said. “They’ve worked to keep the peace outside ICE facilities and in other places, and we've demonstrated that our sovereignty should be respected.”

- YouTube youtu.be

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Another Trump-appointed judge joins unanimous ruling against key policy

President Donald Trump's administration suffered another major setback this week when it lost a court decision on a 3-0 ruling. One of those three judges was appointed by Trump himself during his first term.

Politico legal correspondent Josh Gerstein reported Thursday that a 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel of three judges all unanimously agreed that the Trump administration's justification for deploying National Guard troops in Chicago, Illinois — which it said was necessary to quell a "rebellion" — was not based in fact. Senior Judges Ilana Rovner (appointed by George H.W. Bush) and David Hamilton (a Barack Obama appointee) and Amy St. Eve (who Trump appointed in 2018) all signed their names on the 18-page ruling.

"The critical analysis of a 'rebellion' centers on the nature of the resistance to governmental authority. Political opposition is not rebellion," the ruling read. "A protest does not become a rebellion merely because the protestors advocate for myriad legal or policy changes, are well organized, call for significant changes to the structure of the U.S. government, use civil disobedience as a form of protest, or exercise their Second Amendment right to carry firearms as the law currently allows."

"Nor does a protest become a rebellion merely because of sporadic and isolated incidents of unlawful activity or even violence committed by rogue participants in the protest," the judges continued. "Such conduct exceeds the scope of the First Amendment, of course, and law enforcement has apprehended the perpetrators accordingly. But because rebellions at least use deliberate, organized violence to resist governmental authority, the problematic incidents in this record clearly fall within the considerable daylight between protected speech and rebellion."

Typically, a president can only deploy the National Guard under Title 32 authority, which stipulates that even though the president may call the guard, it can only be valid if a state's governor officially requests it. And under Title 32, National Guardsmen report to the governor and their respective adjutant general, instead of the president. Illinois marked the first time Trump deployed the National Guard to a state that explicitly opposed it.

Thursday's ruling upheld a previous ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois that the Trump administration was prohibited from deploying National Guard troops within Illinois borders. Trump can either appeal the panel's ruling to the full circuit in what's known as an en banc ruling, or ask the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to take up the case.

Click here to read the judges' full ruling.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

'Wannabe dictator': Governor dares 'unhinged' Trump to carry out threat to jail him

Just hours after President Donald Trump called for him to be jailed, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker fired back — taunting, daring, and challenging the President in a striking rebuke.

Asked on camera to respond to President Trump’s remarks, Governor Pritzker said, “Well, let’s start with the idea that this is a convicted felon — I mean, think about that — who’s threatening to jail me.”

“I gotta say, this guy’s unhinged,” Pritzker said of the President.

“He’s insecure, he’s a wannabe dictator, and there’s one thing I really want to say to Donald Trump,” the governor continued, before looking directly into the camera.

READ MORE: ‘Grave Danger’: Democrat Warns Trump’s ‘Authoritarian Takeover’ Would Let GOP Rule ‘Forever’

“If you come for my people, you come through me. So come and get me.”

When asked what he meant, Pritzker replied: “You know as well as I do.”

The governor also told MSNBC’s Jacob Soboroff that Trump “said he was going after the worst of the worst. It’s not going after the worst of the worst when you’re just literally stopping children who happen to be brown and asking them for papers as if they’re gonna have proof that they’re a U.S. citizen.”

“We want everybody to pull out your phones,” he added, “and film everything you see.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Governor Pritzker vowed to “not back down,” and warned that “Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives checking his power. What else is left on the path to full-blown authoritarianism?”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump admin's 'show of force' in US cities can't 'shore up a flailing president': analysis

President Donald Trump's plans for mass deportations are, according to Salon's Sophia Tesfaye, "meant to provoke a response to justify harsh crackdowns on Trump’s political foes. She noted that "his people are admitting as much," but those people are having a hard time selling this to the nation —even on Trump-friendly Fox News.

As governors Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) and JB Pritzker (D-Ill.) push back against Trump's mass deportations and dispatching of National Guard troops to Los Angeles and Chicago, speculation and concern grow over the possibility that the president will soon invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows a president to dispatch active-duty military to states that are defying federal law.

This move, Tesfaye argues, is "a show of force meant to shore up a flailing president" suffering from plummeting poll numbers, some even on what was once a Trump strong point — immigration — after U.S. citizens and legal residents have found themselves on the receiving end of the administration's crackdowns.

As a new CNN poll showed that 60 percent of Americans oppose the recent troop deployments, "Trump’s foot soldiers have fanned out across the country to sell an increasingly wary nation on effectively federalizing policing in American cities," Tesfaye says.

FBI Director Kash Patel, for example, posted on X that "Chicago will be saved," upon his — and troops' — arrival despite the fact that Chicago "just ended a summer with the lowest homicide rate in 60 years," writes Tesfaye.

"Criticism is escalating in the wake of a series of over-the-top ICE operations in the last week, including allegedly pepper spraying Chicago police and detaining children," she wrote, while also describing Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's most recent embarrassment in the Windy City.

Noem, "who said in 2024 there would be 'war on our hands' if former President Joe Biden federalized National Guard troops, kicked off her swing in Chicago with an awkward pit stop on Friday at a municipal building for a bathroom break. But the doors were slammed shut in her face," Tesfaye writes.

"Since the entire tour is a content operation, the embarrassing moment was caught on camera," Tesfaye says.

She also observed that right-wing YouTube star Benny Johnson "is documenting the supposed collapsing civic order in cities on behalf of the White House," but his presence "may be doing more to undermine any message of power and control Noem hopes to convey."

In the wake of MAGA fury over Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny headlining the Super Bowl halftime show, Noem's response, Tesfaye says, was "hysterical."

"Well, they suck and we’ll win, and God will bless us and we’ll stand and be proud of ourselves at the end of the day, and they won’t be able to sleep at night because they don’t know what they believe. And they’re so weak, we’ll fix it," Noem said.

Besides Patel and Noem, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller "also recently ramped up his media appearances to legitimize the administration’s controversial operations" but has suffered his own "major media mishap," according to Tesfaye.

She recalled his recent interview with CNN’s Boris Sanchez in which Miller said "Trump had 'plenary authority,' meaning absolute power without limitations or restrictions on the issue, before suddenly freezing in front of the camera."

This "revealing misspeak," as Tesfaye describes it, has also backfired on Fox, where, "comically fixated on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) recent diss of Miller, to the amusement of the New York Democrat."

“I cannot believe they aired this and made him listen to it live. I am crying,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X, sharing a snippet of Miller’s Monday interview with Fox's Laura Ingraham. During that segment, Ingraham aired an Instagram video of Ocasio-Cortez tearing into Miller's height during her Sunday stream.

Fox failed to snap back at that, too, Tesfaye says.

"Their only jab back at her was that she’s wearing comfortable clothing in her own home," Tesfaye says.

"'Well, we knew that her brain didn’t work,' Miller responded. 'Now we know her eyes don’t work. So, she’s a mess, right? What a trainwreck."

The next day, his wife, Katie, was pressed about Ocasio-Cortez’s mockery of her husband by Fox News host Will Cain, and she clarified that her husband was actually 5'10".

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
@2026 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.