Judge Limits Trump's 'Federal' Force Against Citizens
Bloomberg casually notes a judge has 'restricted' federal agents' use of force against Chicago protestors, specifically those demonstrating against Trump's immigration policies. The implication here is that a judge needing to clarify federal agents can't just willy-nilly use force against the populace is, in itself, a shocking revelation. One might recall images from Portland (2020), where
unmarked federal agents snatched protestors off streets with zero judicial oversight, an act more akin to authoritarian regimes than a constitutional republic. The underlying assumption – that federal agencies require a judge's permission to *not* use excessive force on American citizens – begs the question: What exactly did they think their mandate was before? Congress could, of course, legislate
clear limits, but a quick check of voting records reveals bipartisan enthusiasm for expanding police powers, while civil liberties often take a backseat. These are, after all, the same feds who can deploy advanced surveillance technology with minimal warrants, funded by budgets that routinely eclipse social programs. This judge's ruling, then, is less a landmark victory for civil rights and more a
barely-there speed bump for state power.