Border Patrol Chief Accused of Lying About Past ICE Surge

A recent federal court ruling has raised significant concerns about the credibility of Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino. The judge’s findings describe Bovino as “evasive” and “not credible,” and allege he was “outright lying” during his sworn testimony regarding the conduct of agents during immigration enforcement operations.

Key Findings on Bovino’s Conduct

The ruling stems from a civil lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) connected to Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago. Judge Sara Ellis reviewed hours of depositions, body camera footage, and other court documents that scrutinized Bovino’s leadership during this operation.

Credibility Issues

• Judge Ellis characterized Bovino’s testimony as evasive and marked by “cute” responses.
• Specific instances of lying were noted, including conflicting accounts of his actions during the operation.

Context of the Investigation

In 2022, Bovino became a key figure in the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement initiatives in major U.S. cities like Chicago and Los Angeles. Recently, he has been active in response to rising immigration issues in Minnesota, working alongside DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.

Use of Force Incidents

A critical moment in the investigation involved the deployment of tear gas during protests in Chicago. Videos revealed that Bovino ordered the use of tear gas despite protests from within his own agency.

Admission of Wrongdoing

• Bovino acknowledged during the deposition that he did not provide a warning before deploying tear gas.
• He insisted that all uses of force were “exemplary,” despite acknowledging a lack of sound judgment in specific instances.

Conflicting Statements

Judge Ellis highlighted that Bovino made multiple contradictory statements about why he deployed tear gas. Initially claiming a rock had struck him, he later recanted, admitting that he acted prematurely. These inconsistencies have cast doubt on the integrity of the DHS’s operational claims.

Implications and Accountability

The judge’s findings have serious implications for the accountability of federal law enforcement. Ellis determined that the DHS’s actions were characterized by “widespread misrepresentations.” This ruling may prompt further scrutiny of the strategies employed by immigration enforcement authorities nationwide.

The situation surrounding Gregory Bovino illustrates the ongoing tensions and challenges in immigration enforcement and public safety, as well as the need for transparent and credible leadership within federal agencies.