.png)
2 hours ago
3
The Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's request to allow the president to proceed with immediately deploying National Guard troops to Chicago — delivering a blow, if temporary, to President Donald Trump as he seeks to expand his federalization push across the U.S.
The justices declined the Trump administration’s emergency request to overturn a ruling by U.S. District Judge April Perry that had blocked the deployment of troops. An appeals court also had refused to step in. The Supreme Court took more than two months to act.
Three justices, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, publicly dissented. The outcome is a rare Supreme Court setback for Trump, who had won repeated victories in emergency appeals since he took office again in January.
The update comes after the Trump administration asked the high court last week to stay a lower court order blocking Trump from immediately deploying federalized National Guard troops to Chicago.
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in the administration's appeal to the Supreme Court that a federal judge's earlier order, as well as the partial stay granted by a unanimous 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, "improperly impinges on the president’s authority and needlessly endangers federal personnel and property."
Blocking the deployment of National Guard troops, Sauer argued, risks "jeopardizing the lives and safety of DHS officers," and prevents officials from taking what he argued are "reasonable and lawful measures" to protect federal agents from the "violent resistance" that they argue has persisted in Chicago.
Lawyers for Illinois and Chicago disputed that contention, however.
They argued in a Supreme Court filing of their own that the Trump administration's arguments "rest on mischaracterizations of the factual record or the lower courts' views of the legal principles."
They also cited the lower court judge’s order, which found the administration’s declarations about the nature of the protests in Chicago and nearby Broadview were "unreliable" and overstated the violence and difficulties officers faced enforcing the law.
"As the district court found, state and local law enforcement officers have handled isolated protest activities in Illinois, and there is no credible evidence to the contrary," lawyers for the state of Illinois said Monday.
The update comes as Trump has sought to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to a growing list of Democratic-led cities, despite stated opposition from local and state leaders.
He has faced opposition from a handful of federal courts, including U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, who described Trump's actions in a restraining order this month as "untethered to reality," and failing to reflect the situation on the ground.
A three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit later stayed her order, allowing Trump to proceed with his deployment to Portland.
TRUMP IS THREATENING TO 'FEDERALIZE' DC WITH NATIONAL GUARD AND MORE. HERE'S HOW THAT COULD PLAY OUT
In D.C., a federal judge on Friday will hear updates on the status of Trump's National Guard deployments in D.C., after the city's attorney general said in a new court filing that it appears the National Guard troops will remain deployed through at least summer 2026.
It is unclear whether that is the Trump administration’s plan — and if so, how many of the 2,500 National Guard troops originally sent to D.C. in August would remain in the nation’s capital through that date.
The fight comes as Trump officials argue that the deployments are a necessary step to crack down on what they have said is an uptick in violent crime and protect against threats from protesters, including anti-ICE demonstrations.
Democrats, meanwhile, argue that Trump has failed to satisfy the criteria needed to federalize National Guard troops under USC § 12406, which allows a president to do so in cases of a foreign invasion, if there is "danger of a rebellion" or in cases when regular officers are unable to enforce the law.
They have also argued that Trump's characterizations are hyperbolic and merely a pretext to "federalize" Democratic-led cities and states.
English (US)