Trump’s lawyers ask the Supreme Court to uphold using the National Guard in Chicago
WASHINGTON- President Trump asked the Supreme Court on Friday to confirm the deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago.
His lawyers filed an emergency appeal urging the court to overturn the Chicago judges’ rulings and rule that National Guard troops are necessary to protect U.S. immigration agents from hostile protesters.
The case deepens the conflict between Trump and Democratic state officials over immigration control and once again raises the question of the use of military-style force in American cities. Trump’s lawyers repeatedly went to the Supreme Court and won quick rulings when lower court judges blocked his actions.
Federal law authorizes the president to call the National Guard into service if he cannot “execute the laws of the United States” or if he faces “rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority” of the U.S. government.
“Both conditions are met here,” Trump’s lawyer said.
The Chicago judges reached the opposite conclusion. U.S. District Judge April Perry saw no “danger of rebellion” and said the laws were being enforced. She accused Trump’s lawyers of exaggerating allegations of violence and equating “the protests with riots.”
She issued a restraining order on Oct. 9, and the 7th Circuit Court agreed to keep it in effect.
But Trump’s lawyers insisted the protesters were targeting U.S. immigration officials and preventing them from doing their jobs.
“Faced with intolerable risks of harm to federal agents and coordinated and violent opposition to the enforcement of federal law, the President legally determines that he is unable to enforce the laws of the United States with regular forces and calls upon the National Guard to defend federal personnel, property, and functions in the face of continued violence,” Attorney General D. John Sauer wrote in a 40-page appeal.
He argued that historically, the president had full authority to decide whether to call out the militia. Judges cannot question the president’s decision, he said.
“Any criticism of this type [by judges] must be afforded ample deference, as the 9th Circuit concluded in the Newsom litigation,” referring to the decision that upheld Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles.
Trump’s lawyer said the deployment of troops to Los Angeles was successful in reducing the violence.
“Despite California Governor’s Claim That National Guard Deployment in Los Angeles Will “Scal up”[e]”continued violence that California itself had failed to prevent…the president’s action had the opposite and intended effect. In the face of federal military force, the violence in Los Angeles decreased and the situation improved significantly,” he told the court.
But in recent weeks, “Chicago has been the scene of organized and often violent protests directed against ICE agents and other federal personnel engaged in enforcing federal immigration laws,” he wrote. “On several occasions, federal agents were also punched and kicked by protesters. … Rioters targeted federal agents with fireworks and threw bottles, rocks and tear gas at them.”
“More than 30 [DHS] police officers were injured during assaults on federal law enforcement” at the Broadview facility alone, leading to multiple hospitalizations, he wrote.
Illinois officials blamed aggressive actions by ICE agents for sparking the protests.
Sauer also urged the court to issue an immediate order that would freeze Perry’s decisions.
The court requested a response from Illinois officials by Monday.
