Case: United States v. State of Illinois

01:25-cv-01285 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: Feb. 6, 2025

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case concerns the enforcement of federal immigration laws and the extent to which state and local laws can hinder this enforcement. On February 6, 2025, the United States of America filed a civil action in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The defendants were the State of Illinois, Governor of Illinois, City of Chicago, the Mayor of Chicago, the Chicago Police Superintendent, Cook County, Cook County Board of Commissioners, and the Cook County Sheriff…

This case concerns the enforcement of federal immigration laws and the extent to which state and local laws can hinder this enforcement. On February 6, 2025, the United States of America filed a civil action in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. The defendants were the State of Illinois, Governor of Illinois, City of Chicago, the Mayor of Chicago, the Chicago Police Superintendent, Cook County, Cook County Board of Commissioners, and the Cook County Sheriff. Represented by attorneys from the Civil Division and Office of Immigration Litigation, the United States sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The U.S. claimed that certain state and local laws violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution by interfering with federal immigration law.

The lawsuit challenged the following Illinois, Chicago, and Cook County laws: the Illinois Way Forward Act, Illinois TRUST Act, Chicago Welcoming City Act, and Cook County, Illinois Ordinance 11-O-73. The U.S. argued that these “sanctuary city laws” were designed to obstruct the Federal Government's enforcement of federal immigration law by protecting the information of noncitizens in their jurisdiction. The complaint stated that these laws limited cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration officials, thereby impeding the detention and removal of aliens, including those who are dangerous criminals. They claimed that the conduct of officials in Chicago and Illinois resulted in criminals being released who should have been held for immigration removal from the United States. This lawsuit came after the President of the U.S. signed Executive Order 14,159: Protecting the American People Against Invasion and the 119th Congress passed the Laken Riley Act, both of which signaled a renewed interest in regulating immigration at the federal level. 

The U.S. contended that the Supremacy Clause prohibited the defendant entities from obstructing the Federal Government’s ability to enforce laws enacted by Congress or actions entrusted to it by the Constitution. It also argued that the challenged laws discriminate against the Federal Government. The U.S. asked the Court to declare that the challenged provisions violate the Supremacy Clause and 8 U.S.C. § 1373, and to issue preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the defendants from enforcing these provisions. On February 6, 2025, the case was assigned to the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins. 

On March 4, 2025, the defendants filed motions to dismiss, alleging that all of the plaintiff's claims fail as a matter of law. The defendants Cook County and the County Board of Commissioners also filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. 

The case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Aanvi Jhaveri (2/9/2025)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69616357/parties/united-states-v-state-of-illinois/


Attorney for Plaintiff

Chicago, AUSA - (Illinois)

Attorney for Defendant

Brener, Edward M. (Illinois)

Byrer, Jonathon D. (Illinois)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Gaiser, Thomas Elliot (Illinois)

Garcia, Michelle Teresa (Illinois)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

01:25-cv-01285

Complaint

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

Complaint
25

01:25-cv-01285

Memorandum in Support of the State of Illinois and Governor Pritzker's Motion to Dismiss

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69616357/united-states-v-state-of-illinois/

Last updated April 21, 2025, 4:14 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

Clearinghouse

case assigned

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER
2

CIVIL Cover Sheet (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

RECAP

clerk's notice

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER
3

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by Elisabeth Jo Neylan (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

RECAP

summons issued

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeannice W. Appenteng. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3). (dec, )

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER

CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (dec, )

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER

SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants City Of Chicago, Cook County, THOMAS DART, Brandon Johnson, Toni Preckwinkle, in her official capacity as County Board of Commissioners President, J. B. Pritzker, Larry Snelling, State of Illinois, cook county board of commissioners (khg, )

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

PACER
4

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: In person initial status hearing set for April 15, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2119. Initial Status Report shall be filed by April 8, 2025. The report should comply with the requirements set forth in the Initial Status Report standing order, which can be found at Judge Jenkins's web page @ (http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov, "District Judges", to "Judge Lindsay Jenkins", to "Initial Status Hearings" under Case Management Procedures"). The parties must follow all the standing orders for Judge Jenkins and all Local Rules, which can be found at the same web page. At the Initial Status hearing, the parties are to report on the following: (1) Possibility of settlement in the case; (2) if no possibility of settlement exists, the nature and length of discovery necessary (with specific dates) to get the case ready for trial; and (3) whether the parties jointly consent to proceed before the Magistrate Judge. At the Initial Status Hearing, the Parties shall be prepared to inform the Court about the extent of monetary damages in order for the Court to address the proportionality of discovery as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

Feb. 6, 2025

Feb. 6, 2025

RECAP
5

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois by Christopher Graham Wells (Wells, Christopher) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

Feb. 13, 2025

Feb. 13, 2025

PACER
6

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois by Alex Hemmer (Hemmer, Alex) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

Feb. 13, 2025

Feb. 13, 2025

RECAP
7

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois by Alexandra Lane Reed (Reed, Alexandra) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

Feb. 13, 2025

Feb. 13, 2025

PACER
8

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois by Darren Bernens Kinkead (Kinkead, Darren) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

Feb. 13, 2025

Feb. 13, 2025

PACER
9

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling by Andrew W Worseck (Worseck, Andrew) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
10

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Jessica Megan Scheller (Scheller, Jessica) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
11

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Prathima Yeddanapudi (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
12

SUMMONS Returned Executed by United States of America as to All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Affidavit, # 3 Affidavit, # 4 Affidavit, # 5 Affidavit, # 6 Affidavit, # 7 Affidavit, # 8 Affidavit, # 9 Affidavit, # 10 Affidavit, # 11 Affidavit)(Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
13

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Jonathon D. Byrer (Byrer, Jonathon) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
14

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling by Emily A Vernon (Vernon, Emily) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
15

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling by Amie Leann Medley (Medley, Amie) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Feb. 14, 2025

Feb. 14, 2025

PACER
16

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling by Ellen Wight Mclaughlin (Mclaughlin, Ellen) (Entered: 02/18/2025)

Feb. 18, 2025

Feb. 18, 2025

PACER
17

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Megan Marie Honingford (Honingford, Megan) (Entered: 02/18/2025)

Feb. 18, 2025

Feb. 18, 2025

RECAP
18

MOTION by Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois for leave to file excess pages (Unopposed) (Kinkead, Darren) (Entered: 02/24/2025)

Feb. 24, 2025

Feb. 24, 2025

RECAP
19

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion by the State of Illinois for excess pages 18 is granted. Any motion the State intends to file should, if possible, include an agreed proposed briefing schedule consistent with the Court's standing order. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 02/25/2025)

Feb. 25, 2025

Feb. 25, 2025

RECAP
20

MOTION by Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois to set a briefing schedule for Defendants' Forthcoming Motions to Dismiss and for Leave to File Oversize Briefs (Jointly Filed) (Wells, Christopher) (Entered: 02/28/2025)

Feb. 28, 2025

Feb. 28, 2025

RECAP
21

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for an extension and for excess pages 20 is granted. The Court imposes the following agreed briefing schedule on the motions to dismiss: The State, City, and County Defendants each have until March 4, 2025 to file any Rule 12(b) motion. The government's response is due by April 1, 2025; any replies are due by April 29, 2025. Opening motions by any Defendant may not exceed 25 pages. The government should request an appropriate page extension after the dismissal motions are filed. Emailed notice (cn). (Entered: 02/28/2025)

Feb. 28, 2025

Feb. 28, 2025

RECAP
22

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Thomas Dart, Toni Preckwinkle by Prathima Yeddanapudi (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 02/28/2025)

Feb. 28, 2025

Feb. 28, 2025

RECAP
23

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Thomas Dart, Toni Preckwinkle by Jessica Megan Scheller (Scheller, Jessica) (Entered: 02/28/2025)

Feb. 28, 2025

Feb. 28, 2025

RECAP
24

MOTION by Defendants State of Illinois, J. B. Pritzker to dismiss Rule 12(B) (Wells, Christopher) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
25

MEMORANDUM by J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois in support of motion to dismiss 24 (Wells, Christopher) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

Clearinghouse
26

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Edward M. Brener (Brener, Edward) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
27

MOTION by Defendant Cook County to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Cook County Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
28

MEMORANDUM by Cook County in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 27 (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
29

MOTION by Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Toni Preckwinkle to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Toni Preckwinkle Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
30

MEMORANDUM by County Board of Commissioners, Toni Preckwinkle in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction,, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, 29 (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
31

MOTION by Defendant Thomas Dart to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Thomas Dart Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
32

MEMORANDUM by Thomas Dart in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 31 (Yeddanapudi, Prathima) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
33

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling (Worseck, Andrew) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
34

NOTICE by City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling re MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling 33 Notice of Unconstitutionality (Worseck, Andrew) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
35

MEMORANDUM by City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling in support of Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 33 (Worseck, Andrew) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

March 4, 2025

March 4, 2025

RECAP
36

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Silvia Mercado Masters (Masters, Silvia) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

March 5, 2025

March 5, 2025

RECAP
37

ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Cook County by Jessica Wasserman (Wasserman, Jessica) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

March 5, 2025

March 5, 2025

RECAP
38

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: In light of the motions to dismiss, the April 15, 2025 initial status hearing is stricken and no initial status report need be filed by April 8, 2025. The Court will set appropriate dates following its ruling on the pending motions. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

March 5, 2025

March 5, 2025

RECAP
39

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-23235065. (Gaiser, Thomas) (Entered: 03/20/2025)

March 20, 2025

March 20, 2025

RECAP
40

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Motion to appear pro hac vice 39 is granted. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 03/20/2025)

March 20, 2025

March 20, 2025

RECAP
41

MOTION by Amicus State of Ohio for leave to file Brief of Amici Curiae (Gaiser, Thomas) (Entered: 03/21/2025)

March 21, 2025

March 21, 2025

RECAP
42

ATTORNEY Appearance for Amicus Parties ACLU of Illinois, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Mujeres Latinas en Accion, National Immigrant Justice Center by Rebecca Kim Glenberg (Glenberg, Rebecca) (Entered: 03/25/2025)

March 25, 2025

March 25, 2025

RECAP
43

ATTORNEY Appearance for Amicus Parties ACLU of Illinois, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Mujeres Latinas en Accion, National Immigrant Justice Center by Michelle Teresa Garcia (Garcia, Michelle) (Entered: 03/25/2025)

March 25, 2025

March 25, 2025

RECAP
44

MOTION by Amicus Parties ACLU of Illinois, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Mujeres Latinas en Accion, National Immigrant Justice Center for leave to file Brief of Amici Curiae (Attachments: # 1 EXHIBIT A)(Glenberg, Rebecca) (Entered: 03/25/2025)

March 25, 2025

March 25, 2025

RECAP
45

MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for leave to file excess pages and leave to file a consolidated memorandum, MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America to set a briefing schedule for its anticipated cross-motion for summary judgment (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 03/28/2025)

March 28, 2025

March 28, 2025

RECAP
46

MOTION by Amicus Parties Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Organized Communities Against Deportations, Raise the Floor AllianceMOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMICI CURIAE BRIEF ON BEHALF OF BRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL, ILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS, ORGANIZED COMMUNITIES AGAINST DEPORTATIONS AND RAISE THE FLOOR ALLIANCE (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Bedi, Sheila) (Entered: 03/28/2025)

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

March 28, 2025

March 28, 2025

RECAP
47

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for leave 46 is partly granted. The United States' forthcoming consolidated brief in response to the motions to dismiss may not exceed 45 pages. Defendants' replies remain due by April 29, 2025. The United States also anticipates filing a motion for summary judgment, but Defendants oppose this approach and have asked for an opportunity to explain their reasons. Any response from Defendants (ideally in a single consolidated filing representing all views) is due by April 4, 2025, and that filing should include an alternative briefing schedule to the one the United States has proposed. For now, no summary judgment motion should be filed so that the Court can take Defendants' positions into account and set the appropriate schedule thereafter. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 03/31/2025)

March 31, 2025

March 31, 2025

RECAP
48

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motions for leave to file an amici curiae brief 41 44 45 are all granted. Any amici briefs by the moving entities are due no later than April 8, 2025. Those amici who attached their proposed briefs to their motions should file their briefs as a freestanding docket entry no later than April 8, 2025. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 03/31/2025)

March 31, 2025

March 31, 2025

RECAP
49

Brief of Amici Curiae by ACLU of Illinois, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Mujeres Latinas en Accion, National Immigrant Justice Center (Glenberg, Rebecca) (Entered: 03/31/2025)

March 31, 2025

March 31, 2025

RECAP
50

RESPONSE by United States of Americain Opposition to MOTION by Defendants State of Illinois, J. B. Pritzker to dismiss Rule 12(B) 24, MOTION by Defendant Cook County to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Cook County Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) 27, MOTION by Defendant Thomas Dart to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Thomas Dart Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) 31, MOTION by Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Toni Preckwinkle to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants County Board of Commissioners, Toni Preckwinkle Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) 29, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants City Of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, Larry Snelling 33 (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/01/2025)

April 1, 2025

April 1, 2025

RECAP
51

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE BRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL, ILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS, ORGANIZED COMMUNITIES AGAINST DEPORTATIONS AND RAISE THE FLOOR ALLIANCE by Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Organized Communities Against Deportations, Raise the Floor Alliance, Brighton Park Neighborhood Council (Bedi, Sheila) (Entered: 04/02/2025)

April 2, 2025

April 2, 2025

RECAP
52

ENTERED IN ERROR (Entered: 04/03/2025)

April 3, 2025

April 3, 2025

RECAP
53

RESPONSE by Defendants J. B. Pritzker, State of Illinois to order on motion for miscellaneous relief,,,, text entry,,, 47 Defendants' Combined Response re: Plaintiff's Request for Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule (Wells, Christopher) (Entered: 04/04/2025)

April 4, 2025

April 4, 2025

RECAP
54

NOTICE by United States of America of Intent to File a Reply In Support of Motion to File a Consolidated Memorandum and to Set a Briefing Schedule, ECF No. 45 (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/07/2025)

April 7, 2025

April 7, 2025

RECAP
55

BRIEF filed by State of Ohio and 22 Other States (Gaiser, Thomas) (Entered: 04/08/2025)

April 8, 2025

April 8, 2025

RECAP
56

REPLY by United States of America to Response, 53, MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for leave to file excess pages and leave to file a consolidated memorandum MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America to set a briefing schedule for its anticipated cross-motion for summary judgment 45 (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/08/2025)

April 8, 2025

April 8, 2025

RECAP
57

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: In light of the United States' acknowledgement that the motion to file a consolidated brief is moot given that it has already filed its response to Defendants' motions to dismiss, see Dkt. 50; Dkt. 56 at 4 n.3, the motion for leave to file a consolidated memorandum and to set a briefing schedule for a cross-motion for summary judgment 45 is denied. The United States may file a cross-motion for summary judgment "at any time until 30 days after the close of all discovery." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(b). Any motion it files must comply with Local Rule 56.1. However, the Court will not set a briefing schedule for summary judgment at this time given that the parties have not agreed on whether discovery is needed, and no discovery has taken place. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) (explaining the court may allow parties time to "obtain affidavits or declarations or to take discovery"); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 250 n.5 (1986) ("[S]ummary judgment [may] be refused where the nonmoving party has not had the opportunity to discover information that is essential to his opposition."). Defendants will have one week after any motion for summary judgment is filed to advise the Court, preferably through a single consolidated filing, as to their position on a briefing schedule and discovery in accordance with Rule 56(d). Defendants' replies in support of its motions to dismiss remain due by April 29, 2025. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 04/09/2025)

April 9, 2025

April 9, 2025

PACER
58

MOTION by Plaintiff United States of America for summary judgment (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/14/2025)

April 14, 2025

April 14, 2025

RECAP
59

MEMORANDUM by United States of America in support of motion for summary judgment 58 (Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/14/2025)

April 14, 2025

April 14, 2025

RECAP
60

RULE 56 (c)(4) Statement by United States of America regarding motion for summary judgment 58 (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Declaration of Samuel J. Olson)(Neylan, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/14/2025)

1 Declaration Declaration of Samuel J. Olson

View on RECAP

April 14, 2025

April 14, 2025

RECAP
61

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: Defendants have until April 22, 2025 to advise the Court, preferably through a single consolidated filing, as to their position on a briefing schedule and discovery in light of the United States' motion for summary judgment. No replies are permitted unless the Court requests a reply. Mailed notice. (jlj, ) (Entered: 04/15/2025)

April 15, 2025

April 15, 2025

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority

Special Collection(s):

Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations Involving the Government

Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations Involving the Government (Immigration Enforcement)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 6, 2025

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States of America

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Non-DOJ federal government plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

STATE OF ILLINOIS (Cook), State

City of Chicago (Chicago, Cook), City

Cook County (Cook), County

Defendant Type(s):

Law-enforcement

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.

Constitutional Clause(s):

Supremacy Clause

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

Immigration/Border:

Deportation - procedure

Detention - procedures

Sanctuary city/state