Jon Seidel
LightNews LightNews
banner
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel
@jonseidel.bsky.social
11K followers 69 following 1.2K posts
Federal Courts Reporter, @chicago.suntimes.com
Posts Replies Media Videos
jonseidel.bsky.social
JUST IN: The Trump administration asks the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay Judge Sara Ellis' preliminary injunction restricting the use of force against protesters and journalists in Chicago.

Full motion here: cst.brightspotcdn.com/bc/ac/04906a...
INTRODUCTION The role of the Judiciary is to resolve concrete cases and controversies, not to act as general overseer of the Executive. But in response to the government’s efforts to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws after years of non-enforcement during an unprecedented wave of illegal immigration, courts have issued sweeping, programmatic injunctions that usurp executive authority and empower judges to superintend law-enforcement activities under threat of contempt. The predictable result is to broadly obstruct the enforcement of the Nation’s laws, chill the exercise of executive power, and subvert the constitutional structure. This case is a perfect example. This Court previously issued a writ of mandamus to quash an order of this district court that “infringe[d] on the separation of powers” by “set[ting] the court up as a supervisor” of the agency’s law- enforcement activities. Order, In re Noem, No. 25-2936 (7th Cir. Oct. 31, 2025). The district court has now issued an extraordinary preliminary injunction that no less reflects an improper aggrandizement of the judicial role and a violation of the separation of powers. What began as a complaint by journalists and protestors alleging that DHS officers targeted them with crowd-control devices at a handful of protests in September and early October has transformed into an instrument for judicial micromanagement of federal law-enforcement operations in the Chicago area. Indeed, this injunction is so granular it consumes eight pages, governing everything from body-worn cameras, to agent identification, to the content of warnings before rioters may be dispersed, to when agents may use chokeholds, tackle suspects, or deploy tear gas. This Court should grant an immediate administrative stay and a stay pending appeal. This overbroad and unworkable injunction has no basis in law, threatens the safety of federal officers, and violates the separation of powers. Plaintiffs lack standing to seek this sweeping prospective relief based solely on past incidents of alleged misconduct that they only speculate may recur. Nor can plaintiffs’ claims support the relief ordered, which is untethered from the constitutional and statutory provisions that plaintiffs invoked and which reaches well beyond plaintiffs to restrain all DHS operations within the Northern District of Illinois. The injunction is also unworkable in practice, transforming a single district court into a supervisory tribunal for adjudicating the lawfulness of federal officers’ day-to-day operations. Indeed, plaintiffs have already alleged more than a half dozen violations of the court’s orders—tellingly, based on incidents that involved no named plaintiff at all. This Court’s prompt intervention is once more required to stay this untenable injunction, protect the safety of the public and law-enforcement officers, and restore the balance of power between the Executive and Judicial Branches.
November 10, 2025 at 7:56 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
The latest update on conditions inside Broadview's ICE facility, where a magistrate judge is planning a visit this week.

The Trump administration says it's "compliant" with an order to provide phone services so detainees may communicate with counsel.

Plaintiffs "continue to have concerns."
JOINT WRITTEN STATUS REPORT The parties, by their undersigned attorneys, hereby submit the following joint status report pursuant to the court’s November 7, 2025, order (Dkt. 57) to apprise the court on the government’s compliance with the attorney-client communications provision of the court’s temporary restraining order (Dkt. 49). Defendants’ Position: Para. 10 of the TRO requires defendants to “provide telephone services for each Detainee to communicate with the Detainee’s counsel in private and without cost.” Defendants are compliant with this provision. Detainees have access to a government phone and private area to call their attorneys free of charge upon request. The government has set up a new phone number (708-316-4200) and email address (BSSA.Outreach@ice.dhs.gov) that attorneys may use to initiate contact with their clients. The new Broadview phone number is not fully operational yet, so the government will be using the phone number to the guard shack call (708-316-4192) in the meantime. This number is for attorneys only. Attorneys may also send email requests to email Chicago.Outreach@ice.dhs.gov and CHI-ERO-Detained@ice.dhs.gov until the new Broadview email address is fully operational. The email addresses will kick back an auto reply to include the phone number that attorneys may use to coordinate calls to their clients. The phone number will also be distributed to the Chicago AILA Chapter. The telephone calls are not being monitored or recorded In terms of nighttime lighting, the facility has implemented a 11 p.m.-11:15 p.m. to 5 a.m.- 5:15 a.m. “lights out” period where the lighting will be dimmed (absent any exigent circumstances such as during detainee transfers for safety reasons). Defense counsel asked that plaintiffs’ counsel test the phone number and emails on November 8-9, 2025, and report back in an attempt to trouble shoot before today’s noon deadline. Counsel for the defendants was not made aware of any of the issues reported below until five minutes before the filing deadline. The defense will look into plaintiffs’ complaints. Plaintiffs’ Position: Plaintiffs cannot verify whether Defendants are compliant with the provisions of the TRO concerning attorney-client communications. Plaintiffs continue to have concerns that attorneys are not able to arrange calls to their clients in a timely fashion. The new phone number that the government has set up (708-316-4200) still does not work. As described during the last court hearing, the phone line cuts off after an attorney navigates through the automated menu. On Saturday, November 8, 2025, around 2:45 p.m., Defendants’ counsel provided Plaintiffs’ counsel with the phone number to the Broadview guard shack, as mentioned above (708-316-4192). Plaintiffs are in touch with an attorney, Shelby Vcelka (who testified at the TRO hearing) who called the guard shack number on Sunday afternoon before 3:30pm in an effort to set up a call with her client. She was transferred to a supervisor who told her that someone would call her back within 48 hours. As of 8:30 am today (Monday), she had not heard back. Plaintiffs submit that a 48-hour response time is far too long, particularly given the substantial rights at stake while people are detained and processed at Broadview and the fact that people may be transferred elsewhere sooner than 48 hours. The new email address (BSSA.Outreach@ice.gov) generates an auto-reply, but it lists the ICE Chicago Field office number (872-351-3990). That number disconnects after an attorney navigates through the automated menu. The auto-reply does not contain the guard shack phone number. The Chicago.Outreach@ice.dhs.gov and CHI-ERO-Detained@ice.dhs.gov email addresses do not generate auto-replies. We have received one report from an attorney who appears to have emailed both the BSSA.Outreach@ice.gov mailbox and Chicago.Outreach@ice.gov mailboxes and subsequently received a phone call from a Broadview official in response. That attorney was able to have a phone call with her client. It is not clear to Plaintiffs which email inbox precipitated the response. Nor is it clear to Plaintiffs how frequently either of these mailboxes are monitored or whether attorneys consistently receive a prompt response and client call. Plaintiffs have no information about whether detainees are being provided with the means to make free, unmonitored, and private phone calls to attorneys, or where that is being facilitated within the Broadview facility. With respect to nighttime lighting, Plaintiffs have no information at this time about whether or how Defendants are implementing the new “lights out” period they describe to the Court. Plaintiffs have received no further information about whether detainees are now being provided with a bedding mat or bedding, and have also received no further information about food service at the facility.
November 10, 2025 at 6:09 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
JUST IN: The Justice Department formally appeals U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis' preliminary injunction, which restricts the use of force against protesters and journalists.
NOTICE OF APPEAL IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CHICAGO HEADLINE CLUB et al. ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) KRISTI NOEM, Secretary of U.S. ) Department of Homeland Security, in her ) No. 25-cv-12173 Hon. Sara L. Ellis, ) United States District Judge Defendants hereby appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit this Court’s preliminary injunction order, see ECF Nos. 250 & 256, including this Court’s Opinion and Order granting class certification, see ECF Nos. 252 & 256, to the extent the Court’s grant of a class-wide preliminary injunction depends on that decision.
November 9, 2025 at 9:40 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
JUST IN: The declaration of U.S. Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino

He says he received a body-worn camera, has been trained on a body-worn camera, and is "currently using my body-worn camera in compliance with the preliminary injunction."
DECLARATION OF GREGORY K. BOVINO I, Gregory K. Bovino, declare and affirm as follows: 1. I received a body worn camera on October 30, 2025. 2. I completed the requisite body-worn camera training on October 30, 2025. 3. I am currently using my body-worn camera in compliance with the preliminary injunction. Executed this 7th day of November, 2025, in Chicago, Illinois.
November 7, 2025 at 11:08 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
From a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson, who calls today's preliminary injunction an "extreme act" by an "activist judge."

"We shall appeal."
November 6, 2025 at 9:06 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
We’ve got a newsy day planned at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse.

My colleagues and I at @chicago.suntimes.com will be doing our best to push everything out as it comes, starting with the hearing in Judge Ellis’ courtroom.

Stay tuned.
November 5, 2025 at 1:37 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Overnight court filings seem to be giving us a peek at what U.S. Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino said in his deposition so far (it apparently continues today):
Bovino also asserts he has “interacted with many violent rioters and individuals at the Broadview facility,” and, indeed, will not admit he has ever seen protesters who were not violent rioters. Ex. 100 at 215. Yet Bovino admitted Hhe did not know “what they are,” he explained, and could not remember whether any protesters were non-violent. Id. Ex. 100 at 215. By Bovino’s logic, anyone who shows up to protest is presumptively violent or assaultive and he can then “go hard” against them. Plaintiffs submitted video and testimonial evidence supporting their claims, which stands unrebutted. See Dkt. 82 at 34-36. There is now more evidence showing Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits, including from the depositions of Hott and Bovino. Hott—shockingly— answered “No” when asked if he agreed “agree that it's unconstitutional to arrest people for being opposed to Midway Blitz?” Ex. 101 at 155. Similarly, Bovino testified that he has instructed his officers to arrest protesters who make hyperbolic comments in the heat of political demonstrations, Ex. 100 at 193-97, even though such statements—which do not constitute true threats—are protected speech. See Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705, 708 (1969).
November 4, 2025 at 2:00 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Good morning. Federal prosecutors have moved to dismiss another case stemming from protests outside Broadview's ICE facility — this time involving an alleged attack on U.S. Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino.

The feds recently sought extra time to indict in this case.
GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, by its attorney, ANDREW S. BOUTROS, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss the complaint in this matter. Dated: November 3, 2025 FACTS SUPPORTING PROBABLE CAUSE 4. On or about October 3, 2025, at approximately 9:15 a.m., I observed Border Patrol Agents (BPAs) with United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Enforcement and Removal Officers (ERO) with U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Special Agents with Homeland Security Investigations, and other law enforcement clearing the road into and out of the Broadview Service Staging Area (BSSA), an ICE facility used to process individuals apprehended for being unlawfully present in the United States, and surrounding areas in Broadview, Illinois. 5. I was present on scene and observed many protestors in the area of South 25th Avenue at Harvard Street, blocking and crowding the intersection as law enforcement officers were clearing a path for the exit and entry of law enforcement vehicles onto Harvard Street, which leads to the BSSA, in the performance of their official duties. 6. I also reviewed body-worn camera footage from Border Patrol Agent A regarding various arrests made on October 3, 2025. In the video, at approximately 9:23 a.m., Border Patrol Agents encountered SHERIDAN in a grassy area near the entrance to the BSSA parking lot from Harvard Street and 25th Avenue in Broadview. In the body camera video, I observed that the Officers in contact with SHERIDAN wore vests clearly marked with the words “Police” and either “U.S. Border Patrol” and/or “HSI” on their vests. 7. At approximately the 16:04 minute marker on the body-worn camera of Border Patrol Agent A, I observed a tall Caucasian male with red hair (later identified as SHERIDAN), wearing a white helmet and a white multicolored respirator, as well as with a black shirt and black pants, standing with his hands across his body. BPAs, specifically Border Patrol Agent A, are heard in the video directing SHERIDAN to move back. In the video, at one point after Border Patrol Agent A attempts to move SHERIDAN back by nudging his elbow, SHERIDAN responds by picking his hand up and putting it back into the crossed position in a shrug manner and does not move back. 8. Based on my review of Border Patrol Agent A’s body-worn camera, Border Patrol Agent B specifically instructed SHERIDAN to move back several more times. Border Patrol Agent B and other BPAs provided verbal commands, with Border Patrol Agent B saying, “Move back or you’re under arrest.” 9. While others followed the agents’ direction, SHERIDAN is seen in the video not moving and is heard on the recording saying back, “There are people behind me, you fucking idiot.” 10. Border Patrol Agent A is then seen in the video putting his hand on the chest area of SHERIDAN in an attempt to move him back. 11. Border Patrol Agent A stated that SHERIDAN did not obey commands, appeared to lock arms with other protestors on scene, and from his peripheral vision looked like he took a swing at Border Patrol Agent B. Border Patrol Agent A further stated that he witnessed SHERIDAN push Border Patrol Agent B back when Border Patrol Agent B attempted to push SHERIDAN back. Border Patrol Agent A stated that he further witnessed Border Patrol Agent B falling forward and assisted Border Patrol Agent B with the arrest of SHERIDAN. 12. Border Patrol Agent B stated that he recalled SHERIDAN as a protestor around 9:30 to 10:00 a.m., to whom he provided verbal commands to several times to move back as he was attempting to clear the entry and exit way into Harvard St. and South 25th Avenue., leading to the BSSA. Border Patrol Agent B stated that Law Enforcement Officers were attempting to clear a path for the safe entry and exit of law enforcement vehicles, to secure a safe environment. 13. Border Patrol Agent B stated that SHERIDAN was actively resisting verbal commands and physical attempts by law enforcement to move him back. Border Patrol Agent B stated that he then physically attempted to move SHERIDAN back with his hands. Border Patrol Agent B stated that SHERIDAN pushed him back, and that is when Border Patrol Agent B and other Law Enforcement Officers brought SHERIDAN down onto the ground and placed SHERIDAN under arrest. Border Patrol Agent B recalled that the arrest took place on a grassy area near Harvard Street and South 25th Avenue in Broadview. Border Patrol Agent B stated that SHERIDAN did not actively swing at him but pushed back and resisted him. 14. SHERIDAN is also seen in the body-worn camera footage being brought to the ground by Border Patrol Agent B, assisted by several other officers, and placed in custody.
November 4, 2025 at 1:07 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
UPDATE: A new court filing tonight reveals that U.S. Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino's deposition in Chicago is not finished yet.

It's expected to continue Tuesday.
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER ALLOWING EQUIPMENT INTO EVERETT MCKINLEY DIRKSEN UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE FOR THE DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT GREGORY BOVINO NOW COME, Plaintiffs, Chicago Headline Club, et al., by their undersigned attorneys, and respectfully requests the entry of an order allowing equipment into the Everett McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse for the deposition of Defendant Gregory Bovino. In support of this motion, Plaintiffs state as follows: 1. On October 23, Plaintiffs were granted leave by the Court to depose Defendant Bovino. Dkt.87. 2. The deposition was scheduled to proceed on October 30, 2025 at the Everett McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse at the request of the United States Attorney’s Office. See Notice, attached as Exhibit A. 3. On October 30, Defendant Bovino’s deposition was commenced and continued to November 3, 2025. 4. On November 3, Defendant Bovino’s deposition was again commenced and continued to November 4, 2025 at the Everett McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse.
November 4, 2025 at 2:47 AM
jonseidel.bsky.social
#BREAKING The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sides against U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis, who had asked Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino to appear in her Chicago courtroom on a daily basis.

The appeals court finds that her order "infringes on the separation of powers."
After the district court issued a temporary restraining order affecting some aspects of immigration-law enforcement in the Chicago area, the judge on her own motion entered a further order requiring Gregory Bovino, a Chief Patrol Agent at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to appear in court at 5:45 p.m. every weekday “to report on the use of force activities for each day.” The judge justified this order by stating that she had seen videos that led her to question whether the TRO was being obeyed. The order was not, however, a response to any motion by counsel for the plaintiffs (and the videos to which the judge referred apparently do not deal with behavior involving any of the plaintiffs). The federal defendants seek a writ of mandamus with respect to this aspect (and only this aspect) of the district court’s rulings. We issued a stay of the order requiring Chief Bovino to appear and report daily, and we now GRANT the petition for mandamus. While this litigation presents very challenging circumstances, the district court’s order has two principal failings. First, it puts the court in the position of an inquisitor rather than that of a neutral adjudicator of the parties’ adversarial presentations. Second, it sets the court up as a supervisor of Chief Bovino’s activities, intruding into personnel management decisions of the Executive Branch. These two problems are related and lead us to conclude that the order infringes on the separation of powers. Review by appeal at the end of the case would not solve the problems created in the interim, which justifies review by a prerogative writ. See In re Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 941 F.3d 869 (7th Cir. 2019). Cf. Cheney v. United States District Court, 542 U.S. 367 (2004).
October 31, 2025 at 8:30 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
They also question whether Bovino actually "deserves deference as a high-ranking member of the Executive Branch."
Furthermore, Defendants overstate the extent to which Defendant Bovino himself deserves deference as a high-ranking member of the Executive Branch and, therefore, the extent to whether their case-in-chief has any relevance to the situation at hand. Defendants repeatedly cite Matter of Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 941 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 2019), to argue that the order is an improper intrusion on the Executive Branch. Motion at 3, 11, 12, 14, 17. But Matter of Commodity Futures Trading Commission said that “mandamus is the appropriate remedy when a district court has authorized an inquest into the internal deliberations of the Executive Branch’s senior officials.” Id. at 872 (emphasis added). Despite Defendants’ contention to the contrary, Motion at 14, Defendant Bovino is not the “senior official” that Matter of Commodity Futures Trading Commission had in mind. The Commodity Futures Court found that “the Chairman and two Commissioners [of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission]” were “senior officials” because they were “appointed by the President on advice and consent of the Senate.” 941 F.3d at 872 (7th Cir. 2019). But Defendant Bovino is not close to a Senate-confirmed official, and Defendants’ assertion that he qualifies as a high-ranking official is belied by their admission that he “is often in the field directly supervising law-enforcement personnel conducting immigration- enforcement activity.” Petition at 13. Defendants also fail to explain how Defendant Bovino’s appearing in court a handful of times will deprive an actual high ranking official of “the assistance of their staff.” Petition at 17.
October 30, 2025 at 10:07 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit before Judge Sara Ellis in Chicago have filed their response to the 7th Circuit, over whether Border Patrol Cmdr. Greg Bovino should have to appear in court daily.

They note, as Ellis did, that "Bovino himself has stated publicly" that it "poses no obstacle to his work."
The district court’s administrative appearance requirement does not justify the extraordinary relief that the government seeks. The trial court is not micromanaging the Executive Branch, its administrative order is not the “extraordinarily disruptive requirement” the government contends it is, Motion at 1, and it does not “severely limit” Defendants’ ability to address threats of violence. Petition at 2. Instead, concerned with the lack of regard for judicial authority and court orders, the district court has entered a modest and temporary reporting requirement to enforce its TRO, and to investigate whether Defendants are in contempt of its orders. At each stage of the case, the district court has taken great care to ensure that there is no limitation on executive or law enforcement operations or on lawful uses of force. Defendant Bovino himself has stated publicly that the reporting requirement the government now challenges poses no obstacle to his work. Indeed, he said after the district court’s order that he “looks forward” to reporting to Judge Ellis.
October 30, 2025 at 10:00 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Update from U.S. District Chief Judge Virginia Kendall on today's security incident at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse:
Incoming mail and packages sent to the Dirksen Courthouse are routinely screened. Today, at approximately 3:15 p.m. a suspicious package was identified. The United States Marshals Service ordered a shelter in place during the secondary screening of a package. After further investigation, the package was deemed safe. Access to the Courthouse returned to normal at approximately 4:10 p.m.
October 29, 2025 at 10:37 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
#BREAKING The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals puts a hold on Judge Sara Ellis’ order requiring U.S. Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino to appear in court daily.
October 29, 2025 at 8:55 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
MORE NEWS: The Justice Department seeks an "immediate administrative stay" to prevent the requirement that U.S. Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino appear daily in the courtroom of Judge Sara Ellis.
The federal government has petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to vacate its October 28, 2025 order, which in relevant part requires Chief Gregory Bovino, a senior official at U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), to “appear in court, in person,” every weekday “at 5:45 PM” “to report on the use of force activities for each day.” See DE146, at 1.1 As reflected in the attached order, the district court has denied the government’s request to stay that extraordinary and extraordinarily disruptive requirement. Id. Accordingly, the government asks this Court to stay that requirement pending this Court’s disposition of the pending mandamus petition and enter an immediate administrative stay. Indeed, without an immediate administrative stay, the daily appearance requirement that the district court imposed less than 24 hours ago will begin today at 5:45pm. Plaintiffs oppose the stay requests.
October 29, 2025 at 7:57 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
JUST IN: The U.S. Supreme Court wants to hear more in the Illinois National Guard case.

Specifically, it wants to know "whether the term 'regular forces' refers to the regular forces of the United States military" and how that affects the law in play.

Briefing continues through 11/17.
October 29, 2025 at 7:30 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Border in the Court: Today's @chicago.suntimes.com front page story on Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino's appearance at Chicago's Dirksen Federal Courthouse.

Pic by Ashlee Rezin. Reporting w/ @tinasfon.bsky.social: chicago.suntimes.com/immigration/...
October 29, 2025 at 12:58 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
NEW: On the eve of Greg Bovino's court-ordered appearance before Judge Sara Ellis, lawyers in the case ask her to fully bar the feds from using tear gas until she rules on a preliminary injunction.

"Something must be done. Defendants are plainly in contempt, and sanctions are warranted."
October 28, 2025 at 12:12 AM
jonseidel.bsky.social
In another filing tonight in the case before Judge Sara Ellis in Chicago, plaintiffs' attorneys say depositions are set to begin Wednesday (Greg Bovino is among those to be deposed).

But the feds are seeking an order that would make those depos "inaccessible to the public," they say.
October 26, 2025 at 11:20 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Also, Greg Bovino allegedly asked a reporter, “Did Judge Ellis get hit in the head by a rock like I did this morning? … Maybe she needs to see what that’s like before she gives an order like that.”
October 26, 2025 at 8:51 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Lawyers in the case before Judge Sara Ellis in Chicago respond today to this DHS statement about Greg Bovino’s use of tear gas:

“The statement is a lie,” they say.
October 26, 2025 at 8:48 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
#BREAKING U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis orders Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino into court Tuesday.
October 24, 2025 at 7:46 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
NEW: Three months after its dismissal by U.S. District Judge Lindsay Jenkins, the Justice Department files notice of appeal to the 7th U.S. Circuit in its case challenging sanctuary policies in Illinois, Chicago and Cook County.

Background: chicago.suntimes.com/politics/202...
October 24, 2025 at 3:48 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
From DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin regarding Gregory Bovino's use of tear gas this week:

"Border Patrol agents repeated multiple warnings to back up and that chemical agents would be deployed … Riot control measures were deployed, including by Chief Bovino."
October 24, 2025 at 2:11 PM
jonseidel.bsky.social
Included is this screenshot of CBP commander Greg Bovino allegedly “throwing tear gas into a crowd without justification.”
October 23, 2025 at 8:29 PM