Appellate Court Chastises Chicago Judge Who Ruled Against ICE, Accusing Her of Playing ‘Supervisor’ of Executive Branch

An appellate court says that a federal district court judge overstepped in siding with anti-ICE protesters who sued in federal court, accusing the agency of violating their constitutional rights. A three-judge panel on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals says the order in that case was an attempt by the judge to establish herself the “supervisor” of the executive branch. Amid the surge of immigration enforcement officers to Chicago last year, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and the agencies and agency heads charged with conducting deportations were sued by a group of protesters, journalists, and members of the clergy. They alleged that immigration enforcement agents were violating their constitutional rights. Judge Sara Ellis, a nominee of President Obama, sided with the plaintiffs, granting a preliminary injunction which barred agents from using force against protesters and journalists, such as shoving or tackling individuals or using riot control measures unless “exigent” circumstances demand such steps be taken. Judge Ellis later ruled that the agents had, in fact, violated individuals’ First and Fourth Amendment rights. After winning their case before Judge Ellis, plaintiffs later asked that the lawsuit be dismissed amid the appeals process, saying that DHS appeared to have withdrawn its surge of agents to the city of Chicago. Judge Ellis granted that motion, though she dismissed the case without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs to re-file their lawsuit in the event that agents returned. On Sunday, the judges of the Seventh Circuit weighed in, dismissing both Judge Ellis’s original injunction as well as the government’s appeal. In their order, they did not shy away from criticizing Judge Ellise’s actions. Judge Michael Brennan and Judge Michael Scudder — both nominated by President Trump during his first term — sided with the government in its request that the preliminary injunction be dismissed. Judge Frank Easterbrook, who was nominated by President Reagan, dissented. In their opinion, Judges Brennan and Scudder write that Judge Ellis effectively violated separation of powers principles by acting as an overseer of immigration agents’ actions in the city of Chicago.“The court’s injunction also impermissibly infringes on separation of powers principles. It eﬀectively established the district court as the supervisor of all Executive Branch activity in the city of Chicago — a role another federal court of appeals has found problematic,” the appellate judges write. Citing their own “supervisory” power over district courts, the majority sent a warning shot to lower court judges, saying that their order “signals district courts to avoid issuing similarly expansive injunctions against the Executive Branch.”“The district court’s order may also spawn adverse legal consequences,” the majority continues. “Because the district court dismissed this case without prejudice — against the plaintiﬀs’ unopposed request for a dismissal with prejudice — any class members or the lead plaintiﬀs could refile these claims tomorrow. They could ask the district court to reinstate a near-identical preliminary injunction.”Judge Easterbrook, in his dissent, took issue with the procedural methods by which his colleagues decided to dismiss the preliminary injunction. He argued that their order was unnecessary, given that plaintiffs and the government had agreed to dismiss the case. “My colleagues are troubled by some of the events in this litigation, and I share those concerns,” Judge Easterbrook writes. “But appellate judges’ dissatisfaction with the district court’s handling of a suit should not matter unless at least one of the parties is dissatisfied.”

Appellate Court Chastises Chicago Judge Who Ruled Against ICE, Accusing Her of Playing ‘Supervisor’ of Executive Branch

More from the New York Sun

Can America End Tehran’s Nuclear Aspirations Without Boots on the Ground?

CBS News Reporter Who Denounced MAGA ‘Lies’ About 2020 Election Quits Over Network’s Balanced January 6 Coverage: Report

Democrats To Introduce Legislation Explicitly Banning Prediction Markets Related to War and Death

More from the New York Sun

Can America End Tehran’s Nuclear Aspirations Without Boots on the Ground?

CBS News Reporter Who Denounced MAGA ‘Lies’ About 2020 Election Quits Over Network’s Balanced January 6 Coverage: Report

Democrats To Introduce Legislation Explicitly Banning Prediction Markets Related to War and Death

‘CNN Is Not a Serious Organization’: Embattled Network Denounced for Sympathetic Coverage of ISIS Terror Suspects

‘Say Nothing’: Gerry Adams, Alleged IRA Commander, Dons Bulletproof Vest, Denies Ordering Bombings That Shook Britain

Apple News Makes Tiny Increase in Conservative Publications Featured on Top Stories List After Pressure from Trump Administration

American Missiles Pulled From South Korea To Buttress Campaign Against Iran

Extracting Enchantment From the Austen and Brontë Production Industries