Federal Judge Rules Border Patrol Commander Bovino Lied Under Oath, Issues Sweeping Use-of-Force Injunction

On November 6, 2025, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued a devastating preliminary injunction against Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino and federal immigration enforcement agents in Chicago, in a ruling from the bench that, as WTTW reported it, found that Bovino “admitted that he lied” about the October 23, 2025 tear gas incident in Little Village. The written preliminary injunction order the same day (ECF 250, 8 pages) set the terms; a 16-page Opinion and Order the same day (ECF 252) certified the class and described the defendants’ accounts of the protests and uses of force as “simply not credible”; and the judge’s 233-page Opinion and Order, the written preliminary-injunction opinion where the Bovino findings are set out, followed on November 20, 2025 (ECF 281). Together the rulings found that federal agents repeatedly used force that “shocks the conscience” and then gave accounts the court did not credit, imposing sweeping restrictions on immigration enforcement tactics in the Chicago area.

The Central Finding: Bovino Lied Under Oath

Judge Ellis’s ruling included an extraordinary rebuke of a federal law enforcement commander for dishonesty. No court made a perjury finding, and Bovino has not been charged with perjury. As WTTW reported the oral ruling on November 6:

“Defendant Bovino admitted that he lied” (WTTW’s report of the oral ruling; the transcript has not been read) about being hit by a rock before deploying tear gas in Little Village on October 23, 2025.

The sequence of events Judge Ellis established:

1. Bovino threw tear gas canister at protesters first
2. Video evidence showed no rock hitting Bovino before the tear gas deployment
3. Government initially claimed Bovino was hit by rock before throwing tear gas (to justify force)
4. In deposition testimony, Bovino admitted he was hit (if at all) after throwing the tear gas
5. Bovino’s admission directly contradicted DHS’s official justification for the tear gas use

Judge Ellis stated: “I find the government’s evidence to be simply not credible.”

Additional Finding: Physical Assault and More Lies

The court also addressed video evidence showing Bovino physically attacking a protester:

Video footage showed that Bovino “obviously attacks and tackles” protester Mr. Blackburn to the ground during the October 23 confrontation. However, Bovino claimed in testimony that “he never used force” against anyone that day.

Judge Ellis rejected this claim as another lie, finding the video evidence clearly contradicted Bovino’s sworn statements about not using force.

“The Use of Force Shocks the Conscience”

Judge Ellis’s ruling went beyond individual incidents to characterize the broader pattern of federal agent behavior during Operation Midway Blitz:

“The use of force shocks the conscience” — invoking the constitutional standard for egregious government conduct that violates due process.

The judge found that federal immigration enforcement agents had:

• Deployed tear gas and pepper balls against non-threatening protesters
• Used force against journalists documenting enforcement actions
• Violated prior court orders restricting such tactics
• Systematically misrepresented the threat level posed by protesters
• Lied under oath to justify unconstitutional force

Judge Ellis delivered a particularly pointed rebuke of the government’s legal position:

“It is difficult to conceive how an injunction requiring the government to comply with the Constitution could possibly be harmful.”

This statement rejected DHS arguments that restrictions on force would hamper immigration enforcement, essentially finding that if constitutional compliance hampers enforcement, then the enforcement tactics themselves are unconstitutional.

The Preliminary Injunction Requirements

Judge Ellis issued comprehensive restrictions on federal immigration enforcement tactics in Chicago, converting her temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction that would remain in effect pending trial:

Tear Gas and Chemical Agents:

• Agents must provide two explicit warnings before deploying tear gas, pepper spray, or similar munitions
• Warnings must give protesters reasonable time to disperse
• Deployment permitted only when facing imminent threat to agent safety
• No deployment against non-threatening protesters or bystanders

Body-Worn Cameras:

• All federal agents conducting enforcement operations in field must have body cameras
• Cameras must be worn and kept activated during all law enforcement activities
• Footage must be preserved for potential court review

Clear Identification:

• Federal agents must wear clear, visible identification
• No unmarked uniforms or vehicles without proper identification
• Public must be able to identify agents and their agency affiliation

Protection of Journalists:

• Federal agents barred from using any force against journalists
• May ask journalists to relocate for safety reasons
• Must give journalists reasonable time to comply with relocation requests
• Cannot use force to compel journalist movement

Protection of Clergy and Religious Workers:

• Special protections for clergy attempting to provide pastoral care
• Recognition of First Amendment religious freedom rights

Government Response: “Activist Judge”

The Department of Homeland Security immediately rejected Judge Ellis’s findings and vowed to appeal. A DHS spokesperson called the injunction “an extreme act by an activist judge” and argued that restrictions on force would hamper immigration enforcement operations.

This response notably did not dispute Judge Ellis’s finding that Bovino had lied under oath, nor did it address her finding that the use of force “shocks the conscience.” Instead, DHS characterized judicial oversight of constitutional violations as “activism.”

Connection to ICE Leadership Purge

The timing of Judge Ellis’s ruling was significant. Just nine days earlier (October 28, 2025), news had broken that Gregory Bovino was vetting replacements for 12 ICE field directors being purged by the Trump administration. The government had specifically chosen an official facing contempt proceedings and accused of violating court orders to select new ICE leadership.

Judge Ellis’s November 6 finding that Bovino had lied under oath came after this selection process had already begun, yet there were no indications the administration would remove him from the vetting role. To the contrary, Bovino remained in his “Commander-at-Large” position and continued leading enforcement operations.

Unprecedented Judicial Rebuke

Judge Ellis’s ruling represents an extraordinary judicial finding against a sitting federal law enforcement commander:

• Finding, as reported by WTTW from the oral ruling, that Bovino “admitted that he lied”; in the November 20 opinion the court found his testimony “not credible” and said he was “either providing ‘cute’ responses … or outright lying” in his deposition
• Finding that use of force “shocks the conscience” (constitutional violation standard)
• Finding that government evidence is “simply not credible”
• Rejection of government’s legal theory that constitutional compliance is “harmful”

Federal judges rarely make such direct findings of dishonesty against government officials, particularly senior law enforcement commanders. The language Judge Ellis used—stating plainly that Bovino lied and that the government’s evidence lacks credibility—signals a breakdown in the court’s trust in federal agents’ testimony.

Pattern of Defiance

The preliminary injunction capped a month-long escalation:

• October 9: Judge Ellis issues TRO restricting tear gas use
• October 23: Bovino violates TRO by throwing tear gas
• October 24: Judge Ellis summons Bovino to court
• October 28: Judge Ellis orders daily court appearances (later blocked by Seventh Circuit)
• November 6: Judge Ellis finds Bovino lied and issues preliminary injunction

Each step showed Bovino and federal agents either defying court orders or lying about their compliance, leading to progressively more severe judicial intervention.

Significance

This ruling establishes that:

1. Federal law enforcement commanders can be found by a court to have given testimony that was not credible, including by lying in a deposition, when evidence contradicts their testimony
2. Use of force against protesters can violate constitutional standards even in immigration enforcement context
3. Courts will impose comprehensive restrictions on federal agents who systematically violate rights
4. Government claims that constitutional compliance is “harmful” will be rejected as invalid legal arguments

Most critically, the ruling demonstrates that even explicit judicial findings of lying and constitutional violations do not result in removal from authority—Bovino continued in his role selecting ICE leadership despite a federal judge finding he lied under oath. This represents a fundamental breakdown in accountability for federal law enforcement misconduct.

What the later record shows

The November 20, 2025 Opinion and Order (ECF 281, 233 pages) found: “the Court specifically finds his testimony not credible”; Bovino was “either providing ‘cute’ responses to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s questions or outright lying” in his deposition; and “Bovino admitted in his deposition that he lied multiple times about the events that occurred in Little Village.” The Seventh Circuit decided the appeal in a per curiam opinion dated March 5, 2026, and its judgment vacating the preliminary injunction and dismissing the appeal was entered April 27, 2026 (No. 25-3023, ECF 364), without ruling on the credibility finding; see 2026-03-05–seventh-circuit-vacates-ellis-injunction-chicago-headline-club. CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility then compelled a declaration from Bovino on the findings; see 2026-03-02–cbp-opr-compelled-declaration-bovino-ellis-credibility-findings.

Correction (2026-10-17): An earlier version of this entry called the November 6 ruling a “39-page” order, attributed “admitted that he lied” directly to the court, and described an “explicit finding of perjury.” The written order of November 6 is 16 pages; the quote is WTTW’s report of the oral ruling; and no court made a perjury finding (perjury is a crime and Bovino was not charged). The court’s own words are quoted above.