WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed the Trump administration over its plan to deploy National Guard troops in Illinois over the strenuous objections of local officials.
The court in an unsigned order turned away an emergency request made by the administration, which said the troops are needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.
In doing so, the court at least provisionally rejected the Trump administration’s view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it justifies invoking a federal law that allows the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.
Those circumstances can include when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion” or “the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
Among the issues in the case is what the term “regular forces” means, something the Supreme Court focused on in an order issued on Oct. 29 asking for additional briefing. The question is whether the law only allows for the National Guard to be called up if regular military forces are unable to restore order, or whether the phrase refers to law enforcement.
Although the decision is a preliminary one involving only Chicago, it will likely bolster similar challenges made to National Guard deployments in other cities.
Trump’s unusual move 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.
That view of protests against surging immigration enforcement actions in Chicago is rejected by local officials as well as judges who 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 saying Trump had an ulterior motive for the deployment: to punish his political opponents.
They argued in court papers that Trump’s invocation of the federal law was not justified and that his actions also violated the Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which places limits on federal power, as well as a law called the Posse Comitatus Act that generally bars the military from conducting law enforcement duties.
U.S. District Judge April Perry said she “found no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion” and had issued a temporary restraining order in favor of the state.
The Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely reached the same conclusion, saying “the facts do not justify the president’s actions.”
The court did narrow Perry’s order, saying that Trump could federalize the troops, but could not deploy them.
The Supreme Court has frequently 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 led by Democrats who vociferously oppose his presidency are not just limited to Chicago. He has also sought to deploy the National Guard in the District of Columbia, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon.
Most recently, hundreds of National Guard troops deployed in Illinois and Oregon were set 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 there has been no ruling yet.
A federal appeals court allowed the Los Angeles deployment, and a different panel of judges on Oct. 20 ruled similarly in relation to Portland.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Gary Grumbach contributed.