Chicago-area Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers now risk being arrested themselves if they violate federal court orders, marking an unprecedented check on the agency’s enforcement practices.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Cummings issued a directive barring ICE agents from making arrests at courthouses without valid warrants, targeting “collateral arrests”—the practice of detaining migrants encountered while pursuing others with lawful warrants.
Any breach could result in criminal consequences for the officers involved.
“The fair administration of justice requires that courts remain open and accessible, and that litigants and witnesses may appear without fear of civil arrest,” Cummings wrote, citing multiple instances at Cook County courthouses.
The judge referenced cases where individuals were arrested without proper warrants, including a 47-year-old father mistakenly taken into custody instead of his adult son.
Officers later created a retroactive warrant, which Cummings deemed invalid, ABC 7 reports.
The ruling expands oversight under the 2022 Castañon Nava consent decree, which governs ICE operations in Illinois and five neighboring states.
The court order now requires agents to justify any warrantless arrests, undergo retraining, and submit monthly reports detailing the names, case numbers, and arrest documents for all such detentions in the Northern District of Illinois.
The decree remains in effect until February 2026.
Mark Fleming of the National Immigrant Justice Center called the ruling a major victory for accountability.
“Federal agents have been stopping and arresting people without warrants and without probable cause,” he said. “This order holds ICE officers personally responsible for their actions.”
Among those affected is Abel Orozco-Ortega, detained in January without a valid warrant.
ICE officers had intended to arrest his adult son but mistakenly apprehended Orozco, later issuing a retroactive warrant. He remains in federal custody in Kentucky.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defended ICE’s practices, arguing that officers must apprehend individuals who violate immigration laws whenever they are found.
“Nothing in the Constitution prohibits arresting a lawbreaker where you find them,” DHS stated, according to Breitbart.
Legal experts predict ICE may appeal the ruling, arguing it places unprecedented restrictions on agents performing their duties in the field.
Conservatives warn that holding officers personally liable for arrests could undermine efforts to detain dangerous illegal immigrants and hinder enforcement of federal immigration laws.
The decision has sparked concern among law enforcement officials, who say the added bureaucratic requirements and monthly reporting could slow operations and create legal exposure for officers simply doing their jobs.
Critics also note that the ruling may embolden illegal activity by signaling limits to ICE’s authority, potentially putting communities at greater risk.
Immigrant advocacy groups praised the decision.
Xanat Sobrevilla of Organized Communities Against Deportation said, “To our Black and Brown people and immigrants, it does not always seem like this Earth wants us. But we want us, and that can be enough.”
The ruling highlights increasing tension between federal authorities and local jurisdictions over immigration enforcement.
Cummings’ order raises concerns about judicial overreach and its impact on federal law enforcement.
By placing ICE officers under unprecedented scrutiny for routine immigration enforcement, the ruling could hinder the agency’s ability to uphold the law and protect communities.
Critics warn that such measures may tie the hands of officers on the ground, potentially allowing criminal illegal immigrants to evade accountability while courts prioritize civil liberties over public safety.
WATCH:
