Do not overread today’s order. Our concerns about the substantial overbreadth
of the district court’s injunction lead us to stay it pending appeal, which we will
expedite. But we have not concluded that preliminary relief is precluded. Acting on a
very compressed timeline, the district court has developed voluminous and robust
factual findings. Those findings may support entry of a more tailored and appropriate
preliminary injunction that directly addresses the First and Fourth Amendment claims
raised by these plaintiffs.
19.11.2025 20:59 — 👍 4 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Defendants are likely to succeed on the merits. The preliminary injunction
entered by the district court is overbroad. In no uncertain terms, the district court’s
order enjoins an expansive range of defendants, including the President of the United
States, the entire Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, and anyone acting in
concert with them. The practical effect is to enjoin all law enforcement officers within
the Executive Branch. Further, the order requires the enjoined parties to submit for
judicial review all current and future internal guidance, policies, and directives
regarding efforts to implement the order—a mandate impermissibly infringing on
principles of separation of powers on this record. Finally, the district court’s order is too
prescriptive. For example, it enumerates and proscribes the use of scores of riot control
weapons and other devices in a way that resembles a federal regulation.
We also have reservations about Article III standing. Open questions remain
whether plaintiffs have shown that the past harm they allegedly faced is likely to
imminently happen to them in the future. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 105–
06 (1983). A fear that such harm will recur is insufficient, on its own, to show standing
for injunctive relief. Id. at 107 n.8. And we are aware of public reporting suggesting that
the enhanced immigration enforcement initiative may have lessened or ceased, which
could affect both the justiciability of this case and the propriety of injunctive relief.
Additionally, defendants face irreparable harm. Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S.
831, 860–61 (2025). “Any time that the Government is enjoined by a court from
effectuating statutes enacted by representatives of its people, it suffers a form of
irreparable injury.”
BREAKING: The Seventh Circuit stays Judge Ellis’s preliminary injunction in Chicago Headline Club v Noem, calling it “overbroad.”
www.courtlistener.com/docket/71894...
19.11.2025 20:57 — 👍 7 🔁 1 💬 2 📌 0
Tell me you only read the headline without telling me.
19.11.2025 20:45 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
So many unnecessary arrests to “protect” a closed-off, dead-end street every Friday and Saturday—and now, after another week of horrible optics, they change the rules yet again.
18.11.2025 20:56 — 👍 119 🔁 42 💬 1 📌 0
four days after violently arresting 21 people for walking in the street, broadview “unified command” announces it’s expanding the “free speech” zone outside the ice jail to include part of beach street.
18.11.2025 20:49 — 👍 131 🔁 38 💬 5 📌 5
An independent/3rd party candidate with widespread Democratic Party support couldn't defeat a basically unknown Democratic incumbent caught red-handed accepting a cash bribe.
18.11.2025 21:01 — 👍 3 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
The House just passed a rare rebuke of Rep. Chuy García (D-IL) for quietly clearing the 2026 Dem primary field so his own chief of staff would be the only Democrat on the ballot.
23 Democrats joined almost all Republicans to back the “disapproval” resolution.
18.11.2025 20:35 — 👍 23 🔁 3 💬 2 📌 2
We need to build some real social stigma around being afraid of cities. You don't have to like them or live there, but a politics built this strongly around watching TV and going "ewww" is embarrassing, and people should be embarrassed by it. It's like "fear of werewolves" being your top issue.
10.06.2025 15:17 — 👍 23230 🔁 5106 💬 604 📌 622
- Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 10, 25 @ 1:34 pm:
===I would love for someone to challenge the legality of CBP===
"Midway Blitz" is an ICE operation which CBP is assigned to. The judge in the Castanon Nava case is therefore holding CBP to the same limitations as ICE.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 10, 25 @ 1:34 pm:
.This is from the ACLU of Illinois.
Update on this, btw: ACLU per @capitolfax.bsky.social says that CBP is being held to ICE standard in Chicago as it is an ICE op (then, presumably not operating under 100-mi expanded authorities? though their actions feel that way?)
capitolfax.com/2025/11/10/t...
14.11.2025 13:49 — 👍 10 🔁 2 💬 1 📌 0
If I did, you'd know about it
13.11.2025 17:51 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
