https://cases.justia.com/federal/distri ... 1763733493
It’s long. Like, 300 pages long. But if you want to understand what’s happening in Minneapolis, it’s worth reading.
Plaintiffs were Clergy, Press and other protesters. On behalf of a certified class, they presented the court with over 80 declarations and numerous videos, articles, and other evidence. Surprisingly, the government did not contradict any of this evidence. Instead, the presented videos from body cameras and force reports filed by agents. The government’s argument, in essence, was “they had it coming.”
There was just one problem. When the judge compared the use of force reports with video evidence of the same incident, the agents’ reports of violent protesters who posed danger to them were flat out false. The routine practice appeared to be to violate use of force guidelines and then file reports with made up facts to cover their assess. This led the court to put a section addressing credibility right up front in her opinion.
The judge gave a few examples:With respect to this footage, Defendants specifically directed the Court to certain videos and timestamps “to aid the Court in its review of those videos.” See Doc. 232.
Presumably, these portions of the videos would be Defendants’ best evidence to demonstrate that agents acted in line with the Constitution, federal laws, and the agencies’ own policies on use of force when engaging with protesters, the press, and religious practitioners. But a review of them 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.”
Are you getting it yet? These guys intentionally try to cause car accidents as a pretext for stopping a vehicle, and then tell the public that people are ramming ICE vehicles.For example, Defendants directed the Court to two videos of agents outside the Broadview facility the evening of September 19, 2025. Doc. 232 at 1. In those videos, agents stand behind a fence preparing to leave the facility’s gates and disperse what Defendants described as an unruly mob. Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB474J; Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB375H. The scene appears quiet as the gate opens, revealing a line of protesters standing in the street holding signs. Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB474J at 1:30; Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB375H at 1:45. Almost immediately and without warning, agents lob flashbang grenades, tear gas, and pepper balls at the protesters, stating, ““F” yea!”, as they do so, and the crowd scatters. Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB474J at 1:30–6:30; Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB375H at 1:45–3:20. This video disproves Defendants’ contentions that protesters were the ones shooting off fireworks, refusing orders, and acting violently so as to justify the agents’ use of force.7 See Doc. 172-8 (CBP use of force report for evening of September 19, 2025); see also
Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-09-27_2135_D01A37583 at 1:33:52–1:34:06 (agents admitting that explosions on September 27 were not “fireworks” shot off by protesters but rather “flashbangs”).
On September 26, 2025, video from an agent’s BWC shows a line of agents standing at least thirty feet away from protesters outside the Broadview facility on Harvard Street. Axon Body 4 Video 2025-09-26 1137 D01A3411W at 2:00; see also Doc. 172-11 at 8 (“[T]he crowd [ ] was approximately 30-40 feet away.”). Despite this distance, the agents start yelling “move back, move back” to the protesters and then shoot pepper balls and tear gas at them without any apparent justification. Axon Body 4 Video 2025-09-26 1137 D01A3411W at 2:21–4:19. While the agent wrote in his use of force report that protesters were “becoming increasingly hostile,” Doc. 172-11 at 7, the BWC video shows that the protesters were simply standing there when agents first deployed any force. Axon Body 4 Video 2025-09-26 1137 D01A3411W at 2:21–4:19.
Defendants also highlighted an October 3, 2025 video, presumably to show that agents driving the streets faced constant danger from cars ramming them on purpose. Axon Body 3 7 In one of the videos, someone throws a projectile back at agents, which one individual tells agents another person did to protect the crowd from the agents’ use of force. Axon Body 3 Video 2025-09-19 2045 X60AB375H at 4:00–5:00. This is also mentioned in the use of force report, although it is reported that the crowd threw “dangerous objects” at agents “[w]ithout provocation.” Doc. 172-8 at 19, 21. The BWC footage disproves the representation that the crowd threw objects “without provocation,” and the fact that protestors threw objects at agents after they deployed force cannot be used as justification for the use of force that preceded it.
8
Case: 1:25-cv-12173 Document #: 281 Filed: 11/20/25 Page 9 of 233 PageID #:7223 Video 2025-10-03 1122 X60A9929K at 0:00–4:45. But instead of leaving this impression, the video, which almost entirely consists of a view of the back seat of the car and some dialogue about how the agent’s “body cam is on” and he is “still recording,” suggests that the agent drove erratically and brake-checked other motorists in an attempt to force accidents that agents could then use as justifications for deploying force. Id. This also calls into question Hewson’s testimony that motorists have rammed into agents every day during the operation.8 Doc. 255 at 232:19–22.
On October 4, 2025, in Brighton Park, Defendants directed the Court to BWC footage of an agent pushing a protester to the ground, with tear gas and pepper balls released thereafter. Axon Body 4 Video 2025-10-04 1541 D01A83204 at 16:00–18:00. The footage shows the agents allowing the protester they had tackled to the ground to stand up and then tackling him again, kneeling on his head or neck. Id. at 16:14–17:40. Only after agents threw tear gas and pepper balls and pushed the protester to the ground did other protesters throw some bottles of water at the agents, which cannot support the agents’ use of force. Compare id. at 16:00–18:00, with Doc. 191-8.
Seriously, the gap between the government’s claims and the facts is so wide, one is justified in rejecting anything they claim.
The judge reserved the harshest language for Bovino:For example, Hewson testified that people held shields with nails in them, Doc. 255 at 199:22–23, 200:19, 201:17–18, 202:10–11, but video
demonstrates that at least some of these shields were merely pieces of cardboard, none of the shields had nails in them, and nothing warranted the aggression that the agents showed toward the protesters holding these shields, see Axon_Body_4_+_Flex_Video_2025-09-27_2003_D01A2898X at 2:51–2:59. In Albany Park, agents wrote in their reports and DHS publicized that a bicyclist threw a bike at agents, Doc 173-2 ¶ 46; Doc. 191-6 at 1, but video from that event makes clear that agents actually took a protester’s bike and threw it to the side after they had deployed tear gas, Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-12_1345_D01A2797W at 1:30–1:40; Doc. 73-1 ¶ 11.
Hott, who served as the Field Office Director for the ICE ERO Chicago Field Office from August 2025 to October 17, 2025, and currently serves as the Field Office Director of the ERO Washington Field Office, represented in his declarations that someone ripped a beard off an agent’s face and that protesters broke a downspout at the ICE Broadview facility. Doc. 35-1 ¶¶ 12, 22; Doc. 173-1 ¶¶ 18, 33. But when questioned about these instances in his deposition, Hott acknowledged that he did not even know if it was a person that caused the damage to the downspout, much less a protester, and that he did not have proof that the agent’s beard was actually ripped off his face. Doc. 191-4 at 69:6–72:1 (downspouts); id. at 78:2–79:11 (beard).
As for the evidence Defendants marshalled through Parra with respect to CBP’s actions, Parra testified in his deposition that he had only been in the field with CBP a “handful of times, four to five,” during Operation Midway Blitz. Doc. 191-9 at 30:7–10. And he made clear that he based much of his declaration on information he gleaned from use of force reports, with maybe some 10 Case: 1:25-cv-12173 Document #: 281 Filed: 11/20/25 Page 11 of 233 PageID #:7225 (unidentified) review of video footage. See, e.g., id. at 81:17–82:16, 85:17–23, 86:15–91:1 (describing that Parra viewed some video footage, but that he could not recall how much or of what events). Given the inconsistencies between the BWC footage and the use of force reports, with the BWC footage undermining what agents put in their reports, the Court cannot rely on Parra’s broad generalizations of protesters’ actions or Defendants’ responses to those actions.9
Are you getting it now? Depositions are under oath. But when video shows him indisputably tackling a protester, he insists that the video shows the protester tackling him. An agent used Chat GPT to write a use of force report using a one-sentence prompt and a couple photos.Turning to Bovino, the Court specifically finds his testimony not credible. Bovino appeared evasive over the three days of his deposition, either providing “cute” responses to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s questions or outright lying. When shown a video of agents hitting Rev. Black with pepper balls, Bovino denied seeing a projectile hit Rev. Black in the head. Doc. 191-3 at 162:21–165:17; Doc. 22-44 (Ex. 44 at 0:10–12, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). In another video shown to Bovino, he obviously tackles Scott Blackburn, one of Plaintiffs’ declarants. Doc. 191-3 at 172:13–173:7; Doc. 22-45 (Ex. 45 at 0:19–30, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). But instead of admitting to using force against Blackburn, Bovino denied it and instead stated that force was used against him. Doc. 191-3 at 173:9–176:11, 179:11–181:5. Bovino also testified that, in Little Village on October 23, 2025, several individuals associated with the Latin Kings were found taking weapons out of the back of their car, and that they, as well as at least one individual on a rooftop and one person in the crowd of protesters, all wore maroon hoodies. Id. at 227:2–228:21. He further testified that he believed the “maroon hoodies . . . would signify a potential assailant or street gang member that was making their way to the location that I was present” and that “there did begin to appear, in that crowd, maroon hoodies, both on top of buildings and in 9 The Court also notes that, in at least one instance, an agent asked ChatGPT to compile a narrative for a report based off of a brief sentence about an encounter and several images. Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-03_0949_D01A2556T at 00:00–00:42. To the extent that agents use ChatGPT to create their use of force reports, this further undermines their credibility and may explain the inaccuracy of these reports when viewed in light of the BWC footage.
11
Case: 1:25-cv-12173 Document #: 281 Filed: 11/20/25 Page 12 of 233 PageID #:7226 the crowd.” Doc. 237 at 18:22–19:10. But Bovino also admitted that he could not identify a street gang associated with the color maroon, id. at 19:11–13, although Hewson acknowledged that while Latin Kings members usually wear black, “they also can throw on maroon hoodies,” Doc. 255 at 264:17–20.10 Even were maroon hoodies to signify gang membership, the only evidence on footage from the relevant date of individuals dressed in maroon protesting in Little Village consists of a male wearing a maroonish jacket with an orange safety vest over it, Alderman Byron Sigcho-Lopez wearing a maroon sweater with a suit jacket over it, a female in a maroon shirt, a female in a maroon sweatshirt, and a man with a maroon hoodie under a green shirt and vest. Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1053_D01A38302 at 10:03–10:33; Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1106_D01A32103 at 16:12–17:17. Bovino’s and Hewson’s explanations about individuals in maroon hoodies being associated with the Latin Kings and threats strains credulity.
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. As discussed further below, Bovino and DHS have represented that a rock hit Bovino in the helmet before he threw tear gas. See Doc. 190-1 at 1; Homeland Security (@DHSgov), X (Oct. 28, 2025 9:56 a.m.), https://x.com/dhsgov/status/19831860577 ... -uWR74DQ5A. Bovino was asked about this during his deposition, which took place over three days. On the first day, Bovino admitted that he was not hit with a rock until after he had deployed tear gas. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Bovino then offered a new justification for his use of chemical munitions, testifying that he only threw tear gas after he “had received a projectile, a rock,” which “almost hit” him. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Despite being presented with video evidence that did not show a rock thrown at him before he launched the first tear gas canister, Bovino nonetheless maintained his testimony throughout the first and second days of his deposition, id. at 225–27; Doc. 237 at 11–17. But on November 4, 2025, the final session of his deposition, Bovino admitted that he was again “mistaken” and that no rock was thrown at him before he deployed the first tear gas canister. Doc. 238 at 9:12–21 (“That white rock was . . . thrown at me, but that was after . . . I deployed less lethal means in chemical munitions.”); id. at 10:20–23 (Q. [Y]ou deployed the canisters, plural, before that black rock came along and you say hit you in the head, correct? A. Yes. Before the rock hit me in the head, yes.”).
Moreover, videos of what happened in Little Village taken from agents’ BWCs and helicopters do not match up with agents’ descriptions of the alleged chaos they encountered. DHS tried to claim protesters threw fireworks at agents, see Homeland Security (@DHSgov), X (Oct. 28, 2025 at 9:56 a.m.), supra (video at 3:14–3:19 with overlaid text stating “artillery shell type firework shot at agents”), when the helicopter and BWC footage indicates that those explosions were instead agents’ flashbang grenades, see Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1056_D01A47477 at 7:43–45; REL146 at 10:03–09.
Moreover, aerial footage from CBP’s helicopter shows an agent throwing some type of smoke or gas device on a patch of grass off to the side of 27th Street, which further suggests that CBP, and not protesters, were the ones throwing things that CBP and DHS then used as justification to claim that protesters posed a danger to them. REL146 at 15:07–16:18. Defendants, however, cannot simply create their own narrative of what happened, misrepresenting the evidence to justify their actions.
Overall, after reviewing all the evidence, the Court finds that Defendants’ widespread misrepresentations call into question everything that Defendants say they are doing in their characterization of what is happening at the Broadview facility or out in the streets of the Chicagoland area during law enforcement activities.
But why are these agents like this? Well, the fish rots from the head.
Here is the Director of Homeland Security addressing the troops:
And here’s Bovino:She said: When we leave here, we’re going to go hard. We’re going to hammer these guys who are advocating for violence against the American people. What they are doing is advocating to harm not just you and your colleagues but your families and they’re doxing your identities and victimizing people every day by the way that they’re talking, speaking, who they’re affiliated with, who they’re funded with, and what they’re talking about as far as consequences for what we’re doing by protecting this country. So we’re going to go out there and we’re going to make sure that there’s consequences for the way that they’re behaving, and then we’re going to prosecute them. We’re going to bring them to justice. We’re not taking this anymore. . . . We’re going to give you guys all the authority that you need to arrest these individuals who are advocating for violence against you.
And the very head of the fish:You’re going to be put in full effect . . . That crowd there is, is an unsafe crowd on either side. . . . And when they resist, what happens? They get arrested. So it’s now going to be a free arrest zone. And, I’ll give them one warning that that’ll be for safety of, of us and the Secretary to leave. So they’re getting it here as soon as we leave.
President Trump, when talking about the military parade held on June 14, said that for any protesters who want to protest, “they will be met with very big force,” further describing protesters as “people who hate our country.”
His spokesliar later walked it back. Still:
What follows is hundreds of pages detailing excessive force and brutality accompanied by government claims that contradict the government’s own evidence. While it’s clear that there were some bad apples at some of the encounters, the court held that those few did not justify depriving peaceful protesters of their constitutional rights.In September 2025, President Trump suggested that critical coverage of him was “illegal,” noting that “[w]hen 97 percent of the stories are bad about a person, it’s no longer free speech.” Irie Sentner, Trump: “It’s no longer free speech.”, Politico (Sep. 19, 2025), https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/1 ... h-00574219. On November 2, 2025, during a 60 Minutes interview, President Trump indicated that he did not believe that the immigration raids had “gone far enough[,] because we’ve been held back by the judges,” and signaled that he approved of agents’ tactics. Doc. 190-14 (Ex. 132 at 7:05–7:30, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/4VxbTIA8CM).
The court also details the misuse of less than lethal weapons against protesters. The purpose of those weapons is to disburse a crowd. Yet, the court described many examples of these weapons being fired at point blank range, aimed at protesters heads and faces, and tear gas deployed in ways that drove crowds toward the agents instead of away from them.
The court listed a number of incidents that met the “shock the conscience” test:
If you’re not angry, why not?Plaintiffs have marshaled ample evidence that agents intended to cause protesters harm and that no legitimate governmental interest justified their actions. See Lewis, 523 U.S. at 849 (“[C]onduct intended to injure in some way unjustifiable by any government interest is the sort of official action most likely to rise to the conscience-shocking level.”). For example, repeatedly shooting pepper balls or pepper spray at clergy members shocks the conscience. See, e.g., Doc. 22-1 ¶¶ 5 (Rev. Black describing being hit seven times on his head, face, arms, and torso with pepper balls); Doc. 73-14
216
Case: 1:25-cv-12173 Document #: 281 Filed: 11/20/25 Page 217 of 233 PageID #:7431 ¶¶ 18–19 (Rev. Holcombe describing how an agent began shooting projectiles at her as she prayed for him). Tear gassing expectant mothers, children, and babies shocks the conscience. Doc. 73-8 ¶¶ 10, 13–14 (Garcia helping his four-year old daughter and a woman with her baby escape tear gas in East Chicago); Doc. 118-1 ¶¶ 2, 14 (tear gas deployed in Old Irving Park while neighborhood prepared for an annual Halloween parade, prompting the parade to be canceled and activities to remain on school grounds); Doc. 255 at 49:13–16 (Ramirez, herself eight and a half months pregnant at the time, testifying that there were kids on the scene when agents deployed tear gas in Brighton Park). Shooting a pepper ball at a protester from about five feet away shocks the conscience. Doc. 94-3 ¶¶ 11–12; Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1052_D01A4063B at 15:23–15:37; see also Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-14_1251_D01A30574 at 50:08–50:10 (shooting directly at a peaceful protester holding a “Know Your Rights” sign). Pointing a gun at someone for exercising their First Amendment rights
shocks the conscience. See, e.g., Doc. 73-11 ¶ 14 (picture of an agent pointing a pepper ball launcher at a man holding his phone up in East Chicago); Doc. 77-1 ¶ 20 (agent pointing a gun at Munchak’s head, presumably for videotaping an arrest of a landscaper); Doc. 188-3 ¶ 7 (agent pulling his gun and pointing it directly at someone recording him); Doc. 255 at 68:15–69:1 (agent pointed a gun at Cortez for recording agents and informing arrested individuals of their rights in Spanish). Videotaping while driving into concerned neighbors standing in the street shocks the conscience, particularly when the agent later explains it just happened despite “driving slowly.” Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-12_1332_D01A2669A at 7:50–8:10; Axon_Body_3_Video_2025-10-12_1337_X60AB340G at 2:32–2:40, 4:00–4:14. Tackling someone dressed in a duck costume to the ground and leaving him with a traumatic brain injury, and then refusing to provide any explanation for the action, shocks the conscience. ¶¶ 5–6, 9; Doc. 118-1 ¶ 7; Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-25_1045_D01A38582 at 9:14–9:20; see also Doc. 188-1 ¶¶ 18, 23–25 (agents in Evanston kneeling on the back of a young man, bashing his head on the street, and punching his head).
