Supreme Court rejects Trump’s bid to deploy National Guard in Illinois

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the Trump administration’s plan to deploy National Guard troops to Illinois, despite strong objections from local officials.

The court, in an unsigned order, rejected an emergency request made by the administration, which claimed the troops were needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.

In doing so, the court at least tentatively rejected the Trump administration’s view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it warrants invoking a federal law authorizing the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.

These circumstances may include “that there is rebellion or danger of rebellion” or “the President is unable, with regular forces, to execute the laws of the United States.”

The court ruled against the administration on a preliminary issue, finding that the law’s reference to “regular forces” only authorizes the call-up of the National Guard if regular military forces are unable to restore order.

The court order says Trump can only call on the military where it can “lawfully execute the laws” and that this power is limited by another law called the Posse Comitatus Act.

“At this preliminary stage, the government has failed to identify a source of authority that would enable the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” the court said.

As a result, the Trump administration failed to demonstrate that the National Guard Act “permits the President to federalize the Guard in the exercise of its inherent authority to protect federal personnel and assets in Illinois,” the court added.

The decision saw the court’s six conservative justices split, with three in the majority and three dissenting. The court’s three liberals were in the majority.

The dissenters were Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Neil Gorsuch.

“I have serious doubts about the accuracy of the court’s opinions. And I strongly disagree with the court’s handling of this request,” Alito wrote in a dissenting opinion.

Although the decision is preliminary and only affects Chicago, it will likely reinforce similar challenges to National Guard deployments in other cities.

Trump’s unusual decision to deploy the National Guard, characteristic of his aggressive and unprecedented use of executive power, was based on his administration’s stated assessment that the Chicago area was descending into lawless chaos.

This view of the protests against increasing immigration enforcement measures in Chicago is rejected by local authorities as well as judges who have previously ruled against the administration.

The deployment was challenged in court by the Democratic-led state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, with their lawyers arguing that Trump had an ulterior motive for the deployment: to punish his political opponents.

They argued in court papers that Trump’s invocation of federal law was not justified and that his actions also violated the Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which limits federal power, as well as a law called the Posse Comitatus Act that generally prohibits the military from performing law enforcement functions.

U.S. District Judge April Perry said she “found no credible evidence that a danger of rebellion exists” and issued a temporary restraining order in favor of the state.

The Chicago-based 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals reached the same conclusion, finding that “the facts do not justify the president’s actions.”

The court narrowed Perry’s order, saying Trump could federalize the troops, but could not deploy them.

The Supreme Court has often ruled in Trump’s favor in recent months as the administration rushes to the justices when policies are blocked by lower courts.

Trump’s efforts to impose federal control over cities run by Democrats who vehemently oppose his presidency are not limited to Chicago. He also sought to deploy the National Guard to the District of Columbia, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon.

Most recently, hundreds of National Guard troops deployed to Illinois and Oregon were expected to return to their home states.

The deployment in the District of Columbia, which is a federal enclave with less local control, has been challenged in court, but no ruling has yet been issued.

A federal appeals court allowed the deployment in Los Angeles, and another panel of judges ruled on October 20 the same way regarding Portland.