A federal judge moved forward with fact-finding that could lead to criminal charges against prosecutors over a case that grew out of President Donald Trump's Chicago immigration crackdown.
U.S. District Judge April Perry announced the move Thursday at a hearing on alleged misconduct by prosecutors in the "Broadview Six" case, Chicago Sun-Times federal courts reporter Jon Seidel reported on X.
Perry is gathering more evidence as she weighs whether to appoint a special prosecutor, Seidel reported.
If appointed, a special prosecutor would investigate Justice Department officials for criminal contempt, a charge for defying or obstructing a court, the Sun-Times reported.
"My sole focus at this point is on lack of candor, concealment of material facts, or other misconduct that occurred before me," Perry said.
"It's often said that the cover-up is worse than the crime," she added.
U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros' office, which brought the case, has been accused of a cover-up, the newspaper reported. Alleged misconduct by one of his prosecutors was blacked out of transcripts from the grand jury, the citizen panel that votes on charges, before they reached Perry earlier this year.
The case grew out of a Sept. 26, 2025, protest outside an immigration facility in suburban Broadview during Operation Midway Blitz, the Trump administration's deportation campaign in the Chicago area, according to the Sun-Times.
Prosecutors charged six protesters, most with ties to Democratic politics, with conspiring to impede a federal agent, the outlet reported. Boutros dropped the case May 21 after Perry revealed apparent misconduct before the grand jury.
The former lead prosecutor, Sheri Mecklenburg, is accused of speaking with grand jurors outside the grand jury room and using her own credibility to support the charges, according to the newspaper. She is also accused of excusing jurors who disagreed with the case, which she denies.
Mecklenburg retired last month after the U.S. Attorney's Office warned she could be fired for filing anything on her own behalf, her attorneys wrote. She has also said Boutros "personally directed" the felony prosecution despite her objection.
Boutros has said he learned of much of the alleged wrongdoing in April. But he later acknowledged receiving a transcript in October 2025 that documented some of it.
"I want to make quite clear that I'm not reaching any conclusions today about what occurred," Perry said at Thursday's hearing.
Perry said she will draw up a list of issues she wants more evidence on, and that evidence, however it is presented, "has to be under oath, under penalties of perjury," Seidel reported.
"And I'm telling you right now, it will be considered material to the court's decision," she warned, meaning it will weigh on her ruling.
"Generally speaking, if I ask you to produce documents, you would produce them subject to claims of privilege?" Perry asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Nathaniel Whalen, who appeared for the government with prosecutors William Hogan and Diane MacArthur.
"If the court determines there's been willful misconduct," Whalen replied.
Perry called that answer "kind of circular," Seidel reported.
Many of the former defendants watched from the courtroom as Perry found they no longer have "any particular stake" in the dispute, Seidel noted.
Instead, Perry said University of Chicago law professor William Baude agreed to file a brief opposing the government's position as a friend of the court, an outside party that advises judges.
"The greater the power that defies the law, the less tolerant the court can be of defiance," Perry said, quoting the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as she announced her decision.
"With great power comes great responsibility," she added, quoting Spider-Man.
A status report on next steps is due Nov. 2.
