(CHICAGO) The Department of Homeland Security confirmed a major expansion of ICE operations in Chicago, with federal immigration enforcement teams set to arrive within days as of September 2, 2025. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said on September 1 that the agency will “add more resources” to ongoing efforts.
The federal buildup would place additional agents and support staff at Naval Station Great Lakes, about 35 miles north of the city, to stage and support the new push. President Trump has warned he may mobilize additional federal forces in Illinois, including the National Guard, if local leaders do not “straighten out” crime.
City and state officials moved quickly to push back. Mayor Brandon Johnson signed the “Protecting Chicago” executive order on August 30, 2025, drawing a sharp line on how local departments engage with federal immigration enforcement.
The order:
– Bars the Chicago Police Department from assisting in civil immigration actions, except when a criminal warrant is involved.
– Requires federal agents operating in the city to wear body cameras, show badge numbers, and avoid masks or face coverings.
– Directs city agencies to file regular Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests about federal enforcement.
Governor JB Pritzker joined the mayor in denouncing the federal plan, describing it as “tyranny” and “an attack on the American people.”
Federal posture and local reaction
DHS has not provided a precise headcount but confirmed “hundreds” of additional personnel will be allocated. The staging at Naval Station Great Lakes suggests sustained activity rather than a short visit.
Officials in Washington point to public safety and the need to enforce federal law in the United States 🇺🇸. Local leaders argue the effort is political and risks harming trust between neighborhoods and police. These competing claims set the stage for legal fights and a more visible federal presence across Chicago neighborhoods.
City pushback and sanctuary protections
Chicago’s long-standing sanctuary framework remains intact. The city’s Welcoming City ordinance—strengthened in 2021 and reaffirmed this year—prohibits city agencies from detaining or transferring people to ICE solely for civil immigration enforcement.
The “Protecting Chicago” order builds on that approach, restating that the Chicago Police Department stays under local control and will not conduct civil immigration work. City Hall also plans to monitor federal activity more closely through FOIA requests and public reporting.
Context and debate:
– Since 2022, more than 50,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago, straining shelters, legal aid, and city budgets.
– Supporters of sanctuary protections argue they protect due process and keep families together.
– Critics say federal law must be enforced and claim Chicago’s policies draw more unauthorized arrivals.
– City leaders note that overall crime has trended downward in 2025 and argue that mass enforcement won’t fix root causes.
Federal considerations:
– DHS and the White House have not ruled out calling in the National Guard to support detention or transport operations — a step used earlier in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.
– State officials warn they are prepared to sue if troops deploy for civil immigration enforcement.
– Legal scholars expect many court filings testing federal authority versus local control, with questions likely to center on the Tenth Amendment and differences between criminal warrants and civil detainers.
What residents should expect in coming days
Federal officials say expanded ICE operations will start “within days.” Likely developments include:
1. Increased ICE visibility at transit hubs, worksites, and known staging zones.
2. Use of Naval Station Great Lakes for logistics, processing, and coordination.
3. Separation between local police and federal civil enforcement, per city rules.
4. Possible courthouse or jail outreach where criminal warrants are involved.
Immediate implications for immigrant households:
– Higher likelihood of contact with federal agents.
– Local laws do not block federal authority, but they do influence how city agencies respond.
Recommended steps legal advocates emphasize during any encounter with immigration officers:
– Do not open the door unless agents present a judge-signed warrant with your name and address. Ask to see it through a window or under the door.
– You have the right to remain silent and to speak with an attorney.
– Carry a written plan for childcare and medical needs in case of detention.
– Keep important documents in a safe place, and store copies with a trusted person.
Community response:
– Organizations like the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights are expanding hotlines, legal clinics, and “know your rights” workshops.
– Residents can report concerns about agent conduct — especially regarding body cameras, badge display, or the city’s no-mask rule.
A note on accountability: According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, cities that enforce clear standards on federal agents—such as visible identification and camera use—tend to see fewer complaints and faster resolution when alleged violations occur.
Impact on businesses, schools, and mixed-status families
Businesses and schools should prepare for:
– Disruptions such as traffic slowdowns near staging areas.
– Student absences linked to fear of enforcement.
– Possible worksite checks for employers.
Advocates warn that mixed-status families can be affected even if only one person is targeted, especially in shared housing.
Legal outlook and historical context
The legal landscape is fluid:
– State officials signal court action if the administration sends Guard troops for immigration tasks or if federal agents attempt to direct city police in civil matters.
– Federal lawyers are likely to argue that DHS can assign agents and resources wherever needed under federal law.
– Court orders could shape the pace, scope, and methods used in Chicago over the coming weeks.
Historical background:
– Chicago has been a sanctuary jurisdiction since 1985, strengthening protections over decades through ordinances and practice.
– That history informs the city’s current stance: keep local policing separate from civil immigration work, maintain public safety through community partnership, and ensure due process for all residents.
– Federal leaders counter that national immigration laws must be enforced consistently across jurisdictions, regardless of local policy preferences.
Where to get updates and the core tension ahead
Residents seeking official updates can check the Department of Homeland Security for federal information. DHS has said more details are forthcoming as deployment schedules finalize.
City Hall officials stress:
– Local rules remain in effect.
– Chicago police will not carry out civil immigration arrests.
As the federal surge begins, the core tension will play out on the streets: a hardened federal posture, a city intent on limiting cooperation, and families trying to go about daily life under a larger enforcement footprint.
Key takeaway: Expect a more visible federal presence and legal battles over limits of federal authority — while Chicago maintains local rules intended to protect immigrant communities and limit cooperation in civil immigration enforcement.
This Article in a Nutshell
The Department of Homeland Security announced a major expansion of ICE operations in Chicago beginning in early September 2025, with hundreds of additional personnel staged at Naval Station Great Lakes. Mayor Brandon Johnson responded with the “Protecting Chicago” executive order, barring the Chicago Police Department from participating in civil immigration enforcement except when presented with criminal warrants, and requiring federal agents to wear body cameras, show badge numbers, and avoid masks. Governor JB Pritzker joined local leaders in denouncing the federal move and signaled legal pushback. DHS frames the deployment as necessary for public safety, while city officials call it politically motivated and harmful to community trust. The announcement sets the stage for increased federal visibility at transit hubs and workplaces, legal battles over federal versus local authority, and expanded community legal aid and monitoring efforts through FOIA requests and public reporting.
