In Broadview, Illinois, the scene outside the local Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility remains calm this Sunday evening. However, significant developments are anticipated in the legal arena as the week progresses.

On Monday, officials from ICE and Customs and Border Protection are scheduled to appear before a federal judge. Their testimony is expected to delve into instances of force used by federal agents and allegations that agents violated a temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis. The order specifically prohibited the use of tear gas on peaceful protesters without prior warning.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

ABC7’s Chief Legal Analyst, Gil Soffer, provided insights into the upcoming proceedings.

“The situation could become quite intriguing as the judge will closely examine ICE’s compliance with her order,” Soffer explained. “There will likely be a discussion about the implementation of body cameras, which she has mandated, to ensure ICE is adhering to the order.”

The identity of those scheduled to testify remains uncertain following a court filing revelation that Russell Hott, the former interim head of Chicago’s ICE field office, is returning to Washington.

On Friday, the Department of Justice requested that CBP Deputy Incident Commander Kyle Harvick provide testimony instead.

SEE ALSO | Chicago federal intervention: Tracking surge in immigration enforcement operations | Live updates

“I think the judge herself had said, it’s not less important who exactly she talks to and more important that she gets the answers that she wants. It’s going to have to be someone senior enough, otherwise she won’t be satisfied. It’s got to be someone who could be held accountable and is accountable for ICE,” Soffer said.

Monday is also the deadline for the city and state to respond to the Trump administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court asking justices to allow federal troops to take to Chicago-area streets. It comes after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order, barring such action through at least Oct. 24.

“What we’re going to see tomorrow is a response from the city and from the state. And they’ve won two rounds already. The lower district court granted, essentially, their request to prohibit the National Guard from deploying. The appellate court refused to stay enforcement of that order. Meaning it’s still effective, meaning the National Guard still cannot be deployed,” Soffer said.

It is unclear if the Supreme Court plans to hear the emergency motion, but experts say if the high court does take on the case and rule in the Trump administration’s favor, we could see National Guard troops on the ground within a month.