Will someone ask the relevant prosecutors why they think this conduct was “necessary and proper”?

…As used in this Section, "civil immigration enforcement" does not include an action committed by a law enforcement officer or peace officer that is acting within the officer's powers and duties consistent with Illinois law.”

Would be something if Kane Co tries to indict someone when Cook Co hasn’t.

Are the names of the individuals on the list known?

I mean, you could just call out State’s Attorneys for not seeking indictments under state law.

So how many hearings does the administration have this week where an annoyed district court judge is going to ask about this video?

State law gives prosecutors a path to indict ICE agents in some limited circumstances.

State's Attorneys and the AG should be explaining why they are not taking that path.

Pick a handful of egregious cases.
Indict with aggravated battery or something.
Use a special prosecutor if needs be.
Have memos ready to go when they run to fed court for a stay.

Still waiting for a meaningful comment from the Cook County State’s Attorney.

Board of Airport Commissioners of Los Angeles v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., 482 U.S. 569 (1987).

If Idaho could charge in Ruby Ridge, it seems hard to say Illinois’ hands are tied from charging here.

If it weren’t for fear of ICE immunity claims, this kind of conduct would ordinarily be charged as aggravated battery here.

Why there’s no charging is a question for the Cook County State’s Attorney and the state AG.

There are paths in Illinois law that can be used to charge some federal officers with state offenses in some circumstances. But, I haven’t seen anything from the State’s Attorney suggesting she’s interested in having that option.

There are paths available now!

Even if the State’s Attorney were afraid to directly confront feds, maybe she could put each of these agents before a cc grand jury to testify braggingly about how Martinez purportedly assaulted them?

In detail. Lots of discrete yes/no questions with details.

Hey if you’re a State’s Attorney afraid to directly confront feds, maybe put each of these agents before a cc grand jury to testify braggingly about how Martinez purportedly assaulted them?

In detail. Lots of discrete yes/no questions with details.

Ok, I'm reading this elegant complaint as a historic document, while nervous about what's to come.

But, can we talk about the "Chipocalypse"/"Philocaly's" typo in paragraph 86?

What is a text I should read on the Pullman strike?