To Be Clear: USDC Judge Ellis Is A Very Fine Judge -- And She Will Likely Unseal Bovino's Nonsense Here. She Just Needed A Formal Motion, To Be Able To So Order It.

And indeed -- because several of our erstwhile commenters have expressed interest in keeping abreast of the applicable press access / First Amendment law here, we offer the motion essentially in its entirety, in blue below. [These legal precepts appear in every one of the ten federal districts, but are often articulated under other case names.]

But all of them -- nationwide -- point back, to the Nixon era -- and the so-called "Pentagon Papers case", decided by the Supremes, in 1971. That is the modern touchstone.

So, without any additional ado -- here is tonight's motion from the local Chicago papers (acting in unison, as partners, to defend freedom), to seek to find out precisely what Byers swore to, under oath -- in a sealed proceeding, on October 20 of this year, in Chicago -- in connection with the now ruled to be lawless Operation Midway Blitz, led on the ground by Bovino -- and ordered ultimately, by Kristi Noem:

. . .On October 20, 2025, ICE Deputy Field Office Director Shawn Byers, was set to testify in this case. Oct. 20, 2025 Tr. at 50:16-19. Prior to the start of his testimony, Defendants requested “a brief bench conference about something that [it would] like to discuss kind of with the Court before the next witness.” Oct. 20, 2025 Tr. 50:16-18.

The Court then cleared the Courtroom and the transcript at this point indicates that sealed proceedings were heard at sidebar. Oct. 20, 2025, Tr. 51:16.

The ensuing proceeding lasted approximately 30 minutes. During this time, reporters and members of the public were instructed to wait outside the courtroom. Once the hearing was re-opened, Mr. Byers began his testimony. Oct. 20, 2025, Tr. 61:8. As a result, the publicly-available transcript of this hearing contains approximately nine pages of redactions. . . .

On November 11, 2025, Plaintiffs moved to unseal the October 20, 2025 transcript arguing that they “contend in this case that the government has invented false pretexts to justify its actions,” and that Defendants’ desire to keep the transcript sealed “prevents the public from learning about false representations that Defendants have made to this court.” Dkt. No. 183 at 2. Defendants did not respond to Plaintiffs’ motion and the court has not ruled on it.

Media Intervenors echo Plaintiffs’ concerns about the need for transparency in a case where the government has been accused of making false representations to the Court about its actions during Operation Midway Blitz.

There is a constitutional and common law presumption of access to court proceedings that can only be overcome by a showing that there is a compelling interest supporting closure and closure has been narrowly tailored to serve that interest. In re AP, 162 F.3d 503, 506 (7th Cir. 1998). If an overriding government interest is found, the court must provide a clear explanation of its reason for sealing on the record. . . .

The public has a right to access court records, and that right is especially strong when the record informs a judicial decision. Union Oil Co. v. Leavell, 220 F.3d 562, 568 (7th Cir. 2000). This is because “[a]ny step that withdraws an element of the judicial process from public view makes the ensuing decision look more like a fiat, which requires compelling justification. . . .”

“Secrecy in judicial proceedings is disfavored, as it makes it difficult for the public . . . to understand why a case was brought (and fought) and what exactly was at stake in it and was the outcome proper. . . .”

WHEREFORE, Chicago Public Media, Inc., Chicago Sun-Times Media, Inc., and ChicagoTribune Company, LLC move this Court to unseal the entirety of the October 20, 2025 hearing transcript. Dated: December 19, 2025. . . .

Now you know -- and do be excellent to one another, now and always -- namaste.

नमस्ते