The Trump administration’s attempt to swiftly overturn a federal judge’s directive requiring a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) chief to provide daily in-person court updates on “use of force activities” has been temporarily halted by a federal appeals court in Illinois. This move sets the stage for potential judicial scrutiny of the administration’s actions.

U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis from the Northern District of Illinois stirred controversy on Tuesday when she mandated Chief Patrol Agent Gregory Bovino to make daily in-person court appearances at 5:45 p.m. to report on force-related activities.

This directive emerged from a civil lawsuit concerning “Operation Midway Blitz,” which accuses federal agents of employing excessive force in Chicago-area operations. The lawsuit claims these actions were intended to suppress the First Amendment rights of the press, elected officials, religious leaders, and peaceful protesters, especially in areas like the Broadview ICE facility.

During a hearing on Tuesday, Judge Ellis issued multiple orders. These included requirements for agents to wear body cameras and have clear identifiers on their uniforms. Additionally, she demanded daily updates from Bovino, following an incident on October 23, where a video allegedly showed him using tear gas on a crowd, seemingly breaching a temporary restraining order (TRO) designed to limit excessive “crowd-control” measures.

In response, the Department of Justice (DOJ) urged the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to issue an immediate stay. The government argued that Ellis’ order was “extraordinary and extraordinarily burdensome,” asserting it was issued without a formal determination of non-compliance with previous court orders. The DOJ claimed this constituted a “clear abuse of discretion” that infringed upon the separation of powers.

“That unprecedented order,” the DOJ said, “interferes with Chief Bovino’s ability to undertake his responsibilities, is unnecessary to secure compliance with the TRO, and is completely untethered to the claims and allegations underlying this lawsuit.”

“Requiring a senior executive official to appear for daily questioning far exceeds the recognized bounds of discovery. The order significantly interferes with the quintessentially executive function of ensuring the Nation’s immigration laws are properly enforced by waylaying a senior executive official critical to that mission,” the Trump administration continued. “And the order only underscores the extent to which the court has exceeded its judicial role by implementing vastly overbroad relief and arrogating to itself the role of supervising and micromanaging the day-to-day operations of Executive Branch law-enforcement agencies.”

The 7th Circuit acted accordingly and swiftly issued an administrative stay of Ellis’ order — specifically taking Bovino off the hook for now as far as the daily in-person updates are concerned — as the appellate court weighs whether to grant the Trump administration’s request for “extraordinary” relief in the form of a writ of mandamus.

If mandamus follows, Ellis, a Barack Obama appointee, would be forced to vacate her own order for having been a “clear abuse of discretion” or “judicial usurpation.”

“Pending a decision on the petition for a writ of mandamus, the district court’s October 28, 2025 order is temporarily stayed only to the extent it required Gregory Bovino to appear in court, in person, each weekday at 5:45 PM,” read the order, signed by no particular circuit judge. “It is further ordered that plaintiffs shall respond to the petition by 5:00 pm on October 30, 2025.”