It must be related to this recent case
It is further ORDERED that all Federal Agents who are conducting immigration enforcement operations in the Northern District of Illinois, excepting those who do not wear a uniform or other distinguishing clothing or equipment in the regular performance of their official duties or are engaged in undercover operations in the regular performance of their official duties, that are currently equipped and trained with body-worn cameras (“BWCs”) shall activate them when engaged in enforcement activity unless exempted by CBP, ICE, or DHS policy.
a. The definitions of “body worn cameras” shall be as defined in DHS Policy Statement: Body Worn Camera: Audio/video/digital recording equipment combined into a single unit and typically worn on clothing or otherwise secured to a person, e.g., affixed to the outside of the carrier/tactical vest facing forward. DHS Policy Statement 045-07
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71559589/66/chicago-hea...
And here’s the policy statement https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-05/23_0522_opa_...
A good journalist would have found out these things and then shared them and an exceptional one would have told us if there are subsequent policies of the DHS that have changed the BWC procedure. And they could perhaps explain why the DHS cannot simply change the policy instead of fighting in court.
mikebonnell•3mo ago
The judge's insistence may come from other times that a judge's order has been ignored https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-admin-ignores-judges-order-b...
SilverElfin•3mo ago
brendang_sd•3mo ago
epwr•3mo ago
Eg. States set speed limits. A federal LEO can break these when required for their duties (eg. chasing a suspect), but only when required (eg. if they are late for a meeting, they still have to obey traffic laws).
Body cameras do not seem to directly interfere with an LEO’s duty, unless “avoiding accountability” is literally their duty.
mikebonnell•3mo ago
brendang_sd•3mo ago