A federal judge has told ICE to start wearing body cameras during enforcement actions after raising concerns the agency wasn’t following an earlier court order. U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis extended a temporary ruling last week and added the camera requirement a step she said was needed because she’d seen news reports suggesting ICE might be ignoring the first order. “I live in Chicago if folks haven’t noticed,” she said, bluntly adding that she wasn’t going to look the other way.
The original temporary restraining order limits what federal agents can do at protests. It bars the use of so-called riot control weapons- things like less-lethal shotguns, 40 mm launchers, pepper balls and tear gas except when there’s a real risk of harm. Even then, the order requires agents to give at least two warnings and a fair chance for people to comply before resorting to force. The judge also made a point to protect reporters: ICE is not allowed to use force against journalists unless it has probable cause to think they’ve committed a crime.
Because Judge Ellis worried ICE wasn’t complying, she asked the agency to start recording interactions by wearing body cams. She also ordered ICE witnesses to appear in court to explain what happened. Two officials Customs and Border Protection Deputy Incident Commander Kyle C. Harvick and ICE Deputy Field Office Director Shawn Byers are scheduled to testify on Monday.
The court action grew out of a class-action lawsuit filed on October 6 by journalist groups and protesters who say federal agents have been trampling First Amendment rights. The plaintiffs allege a pattern of “extreme brutality,” accusing agents of using flash grenades, tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets and paintballs against crowds – and detaining reporters and demonstrators for long periods. The TRO, and now the body-camera order, will remain in place until November 6 while the court sorts through the claims and watches whether agencies follow the rules.
For now, the added camera requirement is meant to bring clarity and accountability to tense encounters on the street. If agents know their actions are being recorded, the court reasoned, it may both protect civil liberties and give judges the evidence they need to decide whether rules are being broken.