A federal judge has ordered the release of more than 600 people detained in Illinois as part of a recent immigration enforcement initiative, marking a significant development in the legal battles surrounding federal arrest procedures and detention practices. The ruling, issued Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Cummings, requires that bond be granted to hundreds of individuals apprehended during a months-long Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation known as “Operation Midway Blitz.”

The decision represents a major shift for those detainees and introduces new challenges for federal officials who oversaw the enforcement sweep. Immigration advocates have called the ruling an important step toward ensuring compliance with prior legal agreements, while officials at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have warned that the order could hinder immigration enforcement efforts.

Background: Operation Midway Blitz

According to court filings and statements from the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), the operation took place between June and October, targeting individuals across the Chicago metropolitan region. ICE agents took more than 3,000 people into custody during the four-month period, with many detained at facilities throughout Illinois or transferred to other states as part of standard ICE procedures.

The NIJC and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued in federal court that aspects of the enforcement action violated a 2022 settlement agreement limiting certain warrantless arrests in the Chicago area. That agreement had been reached after years of litigation over how ICE conducted immigration operations in Illinois, particularly in sensitive locations such as residences and workplaces.

Attorneys for the advocacy organizations said that, despite the settlement’s restrictions, many individuals were arrested without proper warrants or were detained for extended periods without the opportunity to seek release under bond. The plaintiffs sought immediate judicial intervention, noting that hundreds of individuals remained in custody months after being detained.

The Judge’s Order

Judge Jeffrey Cummings, who presides over the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on Wednesday. In his order, he directed federal authorities to grant bond to 615 detainees by noon on November 21. The order applies only to individuals who are not subject to mandatory detention under federal immigration law and who are not considered significant security risks.

The decision does not mandate the release of every person taken into custody during the enforcement operation. Instead, it requires that a specific subset—those who qualify for bond under federal standards—be given an opportunity for release. Individuals with serious criminal histories or with mandatory detention status remain in custody.

The ruling emphasizes that the government must comply with the terms of the 2022 agreement, particularly provisions limiting warrantless arrests and requiring adequate review before prolonged detention. Judge Cummings noted that several individuals appeared to have been detained without proper legal justification or without timely access to bond hearings.

Challenges Ahead: Locating Detainees Nationwide

One immediate issue raised by the ruling is logistical: many of the individuals covered by the judge’s order are no longer in Illinois.

Mark Fleming, an attorney with the National Immigrant Justice Center who helped lead the case, said during a press briefing that the detainees are “probably all over the country,” making the process of complying with the court order significantly more complex.

Because ICE often transfers detainees between facilities—sometimes across state lines—immigration advocates argue that the government will need to retrieve records, notify facilities, and coordinate with numerous regional offices to ensure compliance.

“How is that process going to happen?” Fleming asked, noting that federal detention networks are vast and decentralized. He added that immigration attorneys and advocacy organizations are preparing to assist with verification, outreach, and legal support for those ordered released.

Advocates Say Many Already Left the Country

According to NIJC estimates, a significant number of people detained during the June-October operation are no longer in the United States. The organization believes that at least 1,100 of the 3,000 individuals arrested have voluntarily departed the country since their detention, in many cases because they believed they had little chance of securing legal relief or fighting their cases.

In a news release issued Wednesday, the NIJC said many of those who decided to leave “gave up” on pursuing their claims or were unable to navigate the complex legal process while detained.

Advocates argue that prolonged detention, lack of access to counsel, and the fear of extended separation from family members often contribute to such decisions.

Government Response: DHS Warns of Public Safety Concerns

Federal officials expressed concern about the ruling. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin issued a statement criticizing the court’s decision, saying it “puts the lives of Americans at risk.”

McLaughlin argued that immigration authorities must have the flexibility to arrest and detain individuals who violate immigration laws, especially those with histories that raise public safety concerns. She also said that the ruling undermines the efforts of federal law enforcement officers tasked with enforcing immigration regulations.

“At every turn, activist judges, sanctuary politicians, and violent rioters have sought to prevent our officers from arresting and removing the worst of the worst,” McLaughlin said in her statement to CNN. She argued that the order would require the release of hundreds of individuals before ICE had fully vetted their cases.

The statement did not specify how many of the 615 detainees—if any—were considered higher-risk individuals, nor did it directly challenge the judge’s legal interpretation of the 2022 settlement agreement.

Legal Questions About Warrantless Arrests

Central to the lawsuit is the question of whether ICE officers conducted arrests in violation of a prior agreement and applicable federal law.

The 2022 settlement required ICE to meet certain standards before conducting arrests without judicial warrants. The plaintiffs argued that during Operation Midway Blitz, agents made numerous arrests in circumstances that did not meet the criteria established in that settlement.

Judge Cummings’ order suggests that sufficient evidence was presented to show that a substantial number of arrests may not have complied with existing limits.

Legal scholars note that this case may set a precedent for future actions in Illinois and potentially influence how other jurisdictions interpret federal authority in immigration enforcement. Some experts expect the federal government to consider an appeal, though DHS has not yet announced any legal action in response to the ruling.

Impact on Immigration Policy and Enforcement

The ruling lands during a period of heightened national debate over immigration enforcement, detention capacity, and the balance between federal authority and legal protections for noncitizens.

For advocates, the decision reinforces their argument that federal agencies must strictly adhere to legal settlements and constitutional protections, even when conducting large-scale enforcement operations.

For federal officials, the case highlights ongoing tensions between federal enforcement objectives and judicial oversight. ICE has repeatedly argued that rapid enforcement actions are essential to maintaining border and interior security, while critics contend that speed often comes at the cost of legal compliance.

Next Steps

With the November 21 deadline approaching, immigration attorneys, federal officials, and advocacy groups face an intense logistical challenge. Facilities across multiple states will need to identify detainees affected by the order, process bond requests, and coordinate release procedures.

The court could issue further instructions or clarifications if the government seeks additional time or if disputes arise during implementation.

For now, the ruling stands as one of the most consequential judicial interventions in recent immigration detentions in Illinois, highlighting the ongoing interplay between law enforcement tactics, judicial oversight, and the rights of noncitizens in federal custody.