U.S. EDITIONTHEWEEKLYOBSERVER.COM

HOME  /  POLITICS  /  CHICAGO

IMMIGRATION

TRUMP-APPOINTED JUDGE DEALS BLOW TO PRITZKER'S ANTI-ICE LAWS

A federal judge let the Justice Department's lawsuit against two Illinois laws shielding residents from ICE proceed, ruling the statutes burden agents' ability to "carry out their duties" — setting up the next round in a state-federal immigration fight.

ON

BY OBSERVER NEWSDESK

The Weekly Observer

AUG 20, 2026 · 3 MIN READ
fXinEMAIL
TRUMP-APPOINTED JUDGE DEALS BLOW TO PRITZKER'S ANTI-ICE LAWS
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, whose administration is fighting the Justice Department's lawsuit over two state anti-ICE laws. Photo by Gage Skidmore, licensed CC BY-SA 2.0.

A federal judge appointed by President Trump handed the administration a significant legal win against Illinois on Wednesday, ruling that the Justice Department can proceed with its lawsuit challenging two state laws designed to shield residents from aggressive ICE enforcement.

U.S. District Judge David Dugan, sitting in the Southern District of Illinois, denied a motion by Gov. JB Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul to throw out the federal government's case, finding in a 16-page order that the Justice Department had "plausibly alleged" the state statutes concretely interfere with the executive branch's duty to enforce immigration law, according to Bloomberg Law.

Two laws, one lawsuit

The two statutes at issue were passed by Illinois Democrats in 2025 in response to "Operation Midway Blitz," an ICE surge that swept through Chicago and its suburbs that September. The Illinois Bivens Act lets people sue federal immigration agents for constitutional violations, exposing them to damages of $10,000 or more per incident. The Court Access, Safety, and Participation Act, known as CASPA, bars immigration arrests within 1,000 feet of state courthouses for anyone appearing in a case. The Justice Department sued Pritzker and Raoul directly, arguing both laws violate the Constitution's Supremacy Clause by trying to dictate how federal officers do their jobs, a case detailed by Legal Newsline.

"LAW ENFORCEMENT, NOT UNLIKE THE HEAD OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, CANNOT CARRY OUT ITS DUTIES UNDER THE BURDEN OF DISCERNING AND WEIGHING THE EFFECTS OF CONFLICTING STATE LAW."

That was Judge Dugan's reasoning for rejecting Illinois's central defense — that the state laws posed no real threat to federal operations and that Washington's lawsuit was premature. Raoul had argued the Bivens Act was little more than a codification of existing litigant privileges; Dugan called that argument "without merit," concluding federal agents are "necessarily burdened" by having to weigh their sworn duties against the risk of personal lawsuits and courthouse arrest restrictions, according to reporting reviewed via Law & Crime.

Illinois officials have leaned on the laws as a centerpiece of the state's pushback against the administration's immigration crackdown. Senate President Don Harmon has said the Bivens Act gives immigrants "a clear, legal path to go after" agents accused of misconduct, while Pritzker has repeatedly criticized what he calls "aggressive courthouse sweeps" carried out during Midway Blitz. The Justice Department countered in filings that the private right of action amounts to a "state-sanctioned private remedy that inevitably will become a vehicle to threaten and harass federal officers."

Wednesday's order does not strike down either law outright — it only clears the way for the underlying case to continue, meaning the fight over whether the Bivens Act and CASPA can survive a full constitutional challenge is just beginning. Dugan gave Pritzker and Raoul two weeks to formally respond to the federal complaint, setting up the next round in a legal battle that has become one of the sharpest state-federal flashpoints of the Trump administration's immigration enforcement push, alongside parallel fights over National Guard deployments to Chicago that reached the Supreme Court earlier this year.

SHARE THIS STORY